
> 

♦ 


A® ^ ‘ 0 - o V 



,v 

■<o '° ‘ * * 


O^ *'»/•'* A® 'f-l ® 

V • ^x- c\ A? . 



/ V ‘^ • ’ / 

^ -aV . . • . 


*0 * 

. ^ . V ^ 

^ r\ ^ ^ 

■» rtV <;^ 

^ ® -3l^ *>l^A 

♦ 



<?> 



' • 

t />< 


jB^nl/ 

K j^ll!//, 

^ » '^x 








-0«o’ 

'a. V 0 ’ * ° 

: V V • i 

-fc 4> • 

,0^ A 

’•<^ 0^ c ° ^ ^o 

, 0 O 

1« ^0^ 




< Vt^ * 

vj. 

o A ■<^ 

O'"'* ^ 0 " 0 °"°-, ’o, 

1^ ^ 0 o <^' '^ 

vr ^ 

' O .0 "- 







^ Q* 

5 ^ 7^*4 A -o. »* A 

♦ . *- ' ^ >» 0^ 0 ® 
.<- o S^ ^ ^ 

..»’ <!.^ * 
V' - ' - 

»*, 


,-.rr.-’A 0 ' a;*. 

aV ^ 

• '*^>v Aa 

o /-> « 




A^ V A 

fA 0»o A'’ . I'». 

jO^ -.^tK,: ,to 


0^0 



<>, >.-..’>' A*^-*'/ v*^\/ * 

% ^ ^"O, *^cv 0^ ^*7' ^ 

' '• ■^j. A^ .y^-^”-- •^- 

v«^^ : ^ 

/• S ^ -» 

. V- - • 

^ '• ^ 

<0 o. -^** 5 ' V> A^ -- . 

^ r\^ o ** o - 

C . O'. -X- . • _ v<i ^O *^<ri:^ o J 





\y^ oT/y7^^\W‘* C^•'a 

!><■ -rw!* ,<j 5 ’^ A •' 


® -9 A^ 9 ^ ^ 

• ^0 

*®«o^ 

■ c\ A v^ A’»' C' 

' ^ ^ »fC(\ gC 7 ^'‘o 


<0 * 
V v * 

^ V . ■ - °. "V -' * * ■ 

• %A •^•. %/ - ■ 


V*'^ 



*$* ° V/ 


' » . 

' « 

K>^% 

JT/tV 
•*• J^Wh 

'Zo^ 


A ^ O „ 0 

A ^ V 


* ^ '■ d 


0^ 

0 °"^ °o 



A' 


0^ c 

'^^ 0 ^ o 

.^ ... .. \.'-7¥f--'y %-^.-'\<p ' 

•<^ V ^ ^ ° ^ *^C> s ® * * '■-y *S^ - "^ * o . 



Y- V 

: : ^ 


A^ \ A xf^ 'o.A 0^ %> ^ 

rv V o N o L ' « ^ /% V « H O 

K ':rsx\\\n^ ^ ci> ^ ^{\l//y>^ *» 

• o V 




A “ 



















. O ♦ o „ o ’ 



*>. ' ' ■ ^ V-. 

C> .0^ ^J^!rL:-- ^ 

A* A?> o^M\¥. A •' 

o ♦ » \ ^ 

A V 



0 

9 I 1 


<<V 




V ^«oO y o^ o'^ 

<6 ^ ^ 


- «' t#' ^ % . 

.A. ^ ' 

r^ ‘ °ZJ '* ^O ^ ‘ 

_ o V • 

o ?rn.’ ,0^ '#-p -. 

•• '='^. 

• o < 




.0' c 0 " ® ^ '^O 

• C • r-.C<Vv f' 

’ -^o'i f 

<» r O 0 

0 ^\''^^' ^ V- .••»- V, .0^ .-Vi,'. '> 

<f - vst^' - •^j. •'rfvV/'):" -<1- ■;■«' ‘ 

f / / y M ^-m \ V V •“ ^ \. W W \I // ^^ 

l> 

A 



. A* °-^ . 

LA ''NJ'si— ^ ^ 

O - 

* * ’ ' - ^ v^ ^ ^ 

A"" '.SIK * ^ '%' 


0 w 





o 

I 

^ *'» «0 ’ o^ *.,,. 0 

V c' aO »»j,-1'-» 

■^-S- A^ ♦^iVa- <?r. <«► ''^fe'- 

V<<;^ ' ® 'Cr. C,‘5 o ,^11^ . 


. ^ 

A '' ^ ♦ <S ^ *CL r^A 

A 'o, »* G^ 

^ ^ t ^ ^ /> ' o ^ c 

^ j-d' t* ^ /-^ > 

'f‘ 4^ ♦ 

• o V 

* .0 


•♦ c 



.V 



• ^£71iKi aV ''.V/iiSW'^ aS vT. 

o ^Tyls^ A -o.*'* 0 ^ ^ A 

^ 0 " ® ^ *^0 A^ o '- ' * ^ C^ O " ° >. 

0 


* 3 lP "'Tj * 

• / ■< * aO * » « 0 ’ 

^ A, ^ 




• A 



• 4 _ 


. «• ' * 


. V , t - . 




^5^ o c 

^ (P .^!c<n!a ° 

^ V . - V* 0 ^ ® 

At*. *1.0 a >7* 

r\ -^, '^^\\\v$^ N~ ^ ^iy/IPJf * f\ 

- ^-V * ' " * ' A° ♦' O « o ’ ^ o - , , T • ’ ^0 •'- <> 7o ’ 

»>vVa" c,'?^ a"^ -aVa'' ..-. 

A ^^Mj/k- '^r.Cp O 

j\ « .v-^'---. o‘[/// 


^ 'T ^ ' 

qV ^o« 0 ^ ^q a .l<*. kP 

' ^ A' 

o > 


V * C,*^ " 

^ r.^ d'. 

W O A 

•* A 

" ^ 0 ^ 

' N~ ^^2/jjyJp * /N 

" o « o ’ ^ ’ ^0 » O 

'> y ’ * °.- o. A^ s‘Vl% ^ 

.GvT 



“.%fy-‘ a'’ A '• 
c- ■'"•■•' A \; 


o »■ ' « 



^P 



• 9 - 








v.ir-' 




I 


'I 


■I 


1 a 


ij 


i 

(I 


<• 


I 























Public and Private Aid 
in 116 Urban Areas 
1929-38 


4 

Copy_ 


4 

5 

SO 


With Supplement for 1939 and 1940 




FEDERAL SECURITY AGENCY 

SOCIAL SECURITY BOARD 

DUREAU OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 


Public Assistance Report No. 3 







FEDERAL SECURITY AGENCY 


a: 

, 1 

f 

SOCIAL SECURITY BOARD I 

Arthur J. Altmeyer, Chairman ^ 

George E. Bigge Ellen S. Woodward j, 


BUREAU OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 
Jane M. Hoey, Director 

Geoffrey M. ay,* Associate Director Peter Kasius, Associate Director 

Anne E. Geddes, Associate Director 


Division of Operating Statistics and Analysis 
Joel Gordon, Chief 

Division of Standards and Procedures 
Elizabeth Long, Chief 

Division of Plans and Grants 
Gertrude S. Gates, Chief 


Division of Assistance Analysis 

Anne E. Geddes, Acting Chief 

Division of Administrative Surveys 
Rose J. McHugh, Chief 

Division of Technical Training 
Agnes Van Driel, Chief 


Field Division 
Mary E. Austin, Chief 


•On leare. 


UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE. WASHINGTON : 1942 
Fnc Mile by the Superintendent of Documents, Washington, D. C. Price 40 cents • 










Public and Private Aid 
in 116 Urban Areas 

1929-38 

With Supplement for 1939 and 1940 


by 

Enid Baird 

with the collaboration of 

John M. Lynch 


Division of Assistance Analysis 

BUREAU OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 


Public Assistance Report No. 3 


FEDERAL SECURITY AGENCY 

SOCIAL SECURITY BOARD 

WASHINGTON, D. C. 




1 


0 


I 


I 



I 


I 

\ • 

V 


i 


• 4 





I 




I 


t I I 

A • • ■ ■ ‘ ♦ ' L ' 

' / : »J N* rH i i ' * ' 






\ 






FOREWORD 


This report summarizes trends in expenditures for public and private 
aid in 116 urban areas during the 12-year period 1929-40, It is based on 
the urban relief series, the only continuous, comprehensive record of relief 
trends extending back to the period preceding Federal participation in relief. 
The report is focused on a quantitative analysis of expenditure data for the 
urban areas, but an attempt has been made to view these expenditures 
against the background of economic depression and the far-reaching 
changes that have occurred in the structure of public and private aid. 
In addition to the composite picture of urban relief trends in the United 
States, the report contains an analysis of relief outlays and patterns of aid 
in the 116 individual areas. Expenditure data for the individual areas are 
shown in appendixes B, C, and D. 

The report was prepared in the Division of Assistance Analysis and was 
written by Enid Baird, with the collaboration of John M. Lynch, under 
the direction of Anne E. Geddes, Associate Director of the Bureau of 
Public Assistance. Special acknowledgment is made to Sybel E. Longhead, 
who has responsibility for maintaining the urban series as a current report¬ 
ing project; to Sadie Saffian, who was responsible for checking and 
revising the basic trend data for all reporting areas and for the preparation 
of the tables in appendix C; and to Elizabeth S. Goodwin, who supervised 
the tabulations and checked the tables and manuseript in the final report. 

Jane M. IIoey, Director, 
Bureau of Public Assistance, 

March 1942. 

in 


/fi ‘ 


tii, ^ 


I' <? 


\ T ' 

\4‘S*«4 


u’, 



p|./. S'j;; 






if- O' . S i ;: ' 



: 


ih 


fy 


y ni. 




w 

' • ^ • ..' 


.^:^:r 




'l£'.':‘ i,‘; ':>.^^..,,;M'-^m*tf ‘ 

■■yvf'' ''■;■■• ;p(v .' 5l««SW V:- ,vv:,!,'-V ■;£ ■'. 


^ If ■ •: ■'‘<^■•'-'".^^■'7 

' 1.1 V ., < ^ 


' .-i; 

V -- I - •' 


.11 


4.K. 



f 

iV.’/; 

r-•,•■*. ■ 

'<iV, >S , 

' V / 

i. *' " \P-' 

fit '• i' 

t ^ ,n • 




N r, ^ n‘4^ * 


:7v;!/V'^s .-v'-. ' •H^ SV'.vV'. /'• 

*': : ' ■:'. ,I''' '.'■ ' ;'. i:'V .■,.;®l '. 




J. 


•■ ^ ' j 


U' 


XI V ' 

{'*•4 X ' ■/• f. ■’:•'' 

j''’ 


f. 








. 4 


r j.' « f' F* ^ ^ '' ‘ * ■■ ' ^ ' *ifi 





' ^X* 

.•• VI • f 







, / 


/V> v- v"» ■'• ■'■' ^ 


I • 

i •■ 




:r"' ; 




, ■ 


-* -■ *< ' ’ »* ’■ ' ■• ' s - .V \ " ■ V.' ' , . . ■ **)p 



;-• JT;-. ‘*r,./ :|i 2 r:^'‘\ ' \ /■,'<> 'y/ 

i': . >•' ' ' . : It M' ■ 

? I' .•!'■■■’ W^iv ■■'- 

jL-iCr V. ''_ . 'ar. :i!j« '/ !■■. t 


r*' 




^ 'w 


i''- ■:ymy i i ' \ ’■■li’^J-'v ■■'?■.'•'•<• ■ ■■ i,.v ■;; 

' '■iv -',.. - .' 4 '. ■!.«!i,'Wto:;f'yy ;■ ■ ■ • «i, ■ - , '• ■ ■J 


_ iM 


^ »■ 


< ’ •>,:'<• i,. 




♦ • 


' ti 


' 


,y} 


i 


,/.-S/ <i4\. ■ n . ■ ‘■i,' 


I ( 
1 




•' -A 



' 


f M .. 



’**,;. f 




g; : y.' . .fm,. 


X ' 


fv. ’■. ■'•■• 'V..' 






^ A 


; '.v: s:vM .^r- 'X 


'•.V.iV: 


I' r 


'^V . 


».'• - . .• 


..,v‘V' 


* I'i- 

> 


‘v l\ 









'■' iXf'f.'y.’.,.,'' V ■'■ ■'■ '• )'’■'ij-' i'?' ■'•' •' y''' ''. 'i ^'.-'; 




■•.f ' 


j, 4 ^ 


•.t 


: '■“te 'h- 


I'' 




.^!^v v.y ■. ■.y-.y ; .'v,. ,, , y 







CONTENTS 


Page 

I. A Decade of Expansion and Change. 1 

11. The Urban Series. 3 

Description of the areas. 3 

Content of the series. 4 

Programs not included. 7 

III. Trends in Public and Private Aid in the Combined Urban Areas. 8 

The background of depression and unemployment. 8 

Relation of urban to national trends. 9 

The 10-year bill. 10 

Trend in total outlays. 10 

Development of component programs. 14 

Trends of component types of aid. 20 

Underlying shifts in the relief structure. 24 

Expansion in per capita burdens. 26 

IV. Diversity in Local Trends and Patterns of Aid. 27 

Factors contributing to diversity. 28 

Comparative trends in total outlays. 30 

Comparative emphasis on different programs and types of aid. 31 

Comparative relief burdens. 33 

Comparative outlays for component types of aid. 34 

V. The Present Decade. 38 

Supplement for 1939 and 1940. 41 

Trends in monthly expenditures.. . 41 

Per capita outlays. 44 

Legislative and administrative developments. 44 

Appendixes. 47 

Index to Charts for Urban Areas.. 166 

TEXT TABLES 

Table 1.—Number and population of urban areas reporting, and percent of total popu¬ 
lation and total urban population covered, by five geographic divisions, 

1930 and 1940. 4 

Table 2.—Amount and percentage distribution of public and private assistance and 

earnings under specified Federal work programs, 116 urban areas, 1929-38. 12 

Table 3.—Range among 116 urban areas in percent of total public and private aid 

expended for specified types of aid, 1929-38. 31 

Table 4.—Extreme, quartile, and median amounts per inhabitant of total public and 

private aid, 116 urban areas, 1929-38. 34 

Table 5.—Median amount per inhabitant of total public and private aid, 116 urban 

areas, by five geographic divisions, 1929-38. 34 

Table 6.—Range among 116 urban areas in amount per inhabitant expended for speci¬ 
fied types of aid, 1929-38. 36 

Table 7.—Number of urban areas reporting expenditures for specified types of aid, 

median amount per inhabitant expended in those areas, 1929-38. 37 

Table 8.—Amount and percentage distribution of public and private assistance and 
earnings under specified Federal work programs, 116 urban areas, 1939 and 
1940. 42 


V 





































TEXT CHARTS 


Page 


Chart 1.—Expenditures for public and private aid in 116 urban areas as related to 
estimates of national unemployment and national income payments, 

January 1929-December 1938. 9 

Chart 2.—Expenditures for public aid in 116 urban areas and in the continental 

United States, January 1933-December 1938. 11 

Chart 3.—Expenditures for public and private aid, 116 urban areas, January 1929— 

December 1938. 13 

Chart 4.— Percentage distribution of $6,853 million expended for public and private 

aid, 116 urban areas, 1929-38. 15 

Chart 5.—Expenditures for private relief, 116 urban areas, January 1929-December 

1938. 20 

Chart 6.—Expenditures for public general relief, 116 urban areas, January 1929- 

December 1938. 21 

Chart 7.—Expenditures for special types of public assistance, 116 urban areas, Janu¬ 
ary 1929-December 1938. 23 

Chart 8.—Public expenditures for direct assistance and for work program earnings and 

work relief, 116 m-ban areas, January 1929-December 1938. 25 

Chart 9.—Amount per inhabitant of public and private aid, by urban area, 1929 and 

1938. 35 

Chart 10.—Expenditures for public and private aid, 116 urban areas, January 1929- 

December 1940. 41 


APPENDIXES 


A. Area and population of 116 urban areas, by geographic division and State. 47 

B. Comparative expenditure patterns for 116 urban areas, 1929-38. 48 

C. Comparative expenditure data for 116 urban areas, 1929-38: 

Table C-1.—Amount of public and private assistance and earnings under speci¬ 
fied Federal work programs, 116 urban areas, by month, 1929-38. 84 

Tables C-2 through C-11.-—Amount of public and private assistance and earn¬ 
ings under specified Federal work programs, by urban area, 1929-38. 86 

Tables C—12 through C—21.—Percentage distribution of amount of public and 
private assistance and earnings under specified Federal work programs, by 

urban area, 1929-38. 112 

Tables C-22 through C-31.—^Amount per inhabitant of public and private 
assistance and earnings under specified Federal work programs, by urban 
area, 1929-38. 132 

D. Comparative expenditure data for 116 urban areas, 1939 and 1940; 

Table D-1.—Amount of pubbc and private assistance and earnings under speci¬ 
fied Federal work programs, 116 urban areas, by month, 1939 and 1940. 152 

Tables D-2 and D-3.—Amount of public and private assistance and earnings 

under specified Federal work programs, by urban area, 1939 and 1940. 153 

Tables D-4 and D-5.—Percentage distribution of amount of public and private 
assistance-and earnings under specified Federal work programs, by urban 

area, 1939 and 1940. 153 

Tables D—6 and D-7.—Amount per inhabitant of public and private assistance 
and earnings under specified Federal work programs, by urban area, 1939 
and 1940. 162 


VI 






















•I • 

A Decade of Expansion and Change 


The decade 1929-38 was one of momentous 
changes in the realm of dependency and relief. 
Outlays for public and private aid rose rapidly to 
unprecedented levels, and a poor-relief system 
that had undergone only superficial change over 
many decades was within a few years radically 
altered to meet the challenge of mass insecurity 
presented by our modern industrial society. 

It is the purpose of the present report to review 
the developments of the decade as they are 
reflected in the expenditure trends and patterns 
of aid for 116 of the largest urban areas in the 
United States. The expenditure data which pro¬ 
vide the basic material for the report were sup¬ 
plied by the urban relief series, the development 
and content of which are described in chapter II. 
An effort has been made to sketch the background 
of economic depression that precipitated the 
sweeping changes that occurred, and to recall the 
sequence of programs and events that influenced 
relief trends over the decade. For the most part, 
however, attention has been focused on the story 
told by the expenditure data themselves and the 
questions that inevitably arise from analysis of 
such quantitative data. 

The story is essentially one of transition and 
evolutionary change under the pressure of the 
most severe and prolonged depression in the 
history of the United States. The acuteness of 
the unemployment crisis in its early stages neces¬ 
sitated action on a national scale and prepared 
the way for the entrance of the Federal Govern¬ 
ment into emergency relief activities and for other 
drastic departures from traditional concepts and 
methods of extending aid. The long duration of 
the depression brought a greater awareness of the 
basic elements of insecurity in our social and eco¬ 
nomic life, and prompted the adoption of more 
stable and more nearly adequate measures to com¬ 
bat the hazards of dependency and provide some 
security against future want. 

In describing the impact of these various 
developments on urban expenditures and patterns 
of aid, two complementary approaches have been 
used. Part of the report is focused on the data 


for the 116 urban areas combined and emphasizes 
the changes in prevailing trends and patterns of 
aid over the decade; the remainder is focused on 
the individual urban areas and emphasizes the 
extreme diversity in local trends and patterns of 
expenditure. 

From the combined urban data there emerges a 
composite picture of the fluctuations and shifts in 
emphasis that have characterized the national as 
well as the urban structure of public and private 
aid during the decade under review. Salient fea¬ 
tures of that picture include the tremendous growth 
in total outlays; the varying emphasis on compo¬ 
nent types of aid; the introduction of new and more 
nearly adequate types of aid and the improvement 
in standards of care under previously existing 
types; the abrupt policy changes affecting the type 
of aid and the level of payments provided for needy 
employable persons; the increased differentiation 
among dependent groups; and the prevailing com¬ 
plexity and variation in eligibility requirements, 
procedures, and standards of care. Less apparent 
in the composite expenditure trends and patterns 
but equally important are the evolutionary changes 
that have taken place in public attitudes toward 
the treatment of dependency and the significant 
shifts that have occurred in the division of finan¬ 
cial, administrative, and supervisory responsibility 
for extending aid to various needy groups. 

The impressions conveyed by the combined ex¬ 
penditure data of complexity, variability, and lack 
of integrated control are confirmed and amplified 
by the comparative analysis of the trends and pat¬ 
terns of aid in the 116 separate areas. 

The series of diagrams for individual urban areas 
in appendix B and the expenditure data for the 
individual communities presented in appendix C 
provide the basic material for a detailed analysis 
and interpretation of the trends and patterns of 
aid in each of the 116 urban areas.^ The concern 
of the present report has been to call attention to 
the existence of diversity in almost every aspect 

> Such an analysis has already been made for one of the urban areas. See 
Geddes, Anne E., “Belief Trends In Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1929-37,” 
Social Security Bulletin, Vol. 1, No. 8 (August 1938), pp. 17-22. 


1 



of the relief structure, to indicate some of the 
manifold factors responsible for the wide interarea 
differences, and to suggest some of the more obvi¬ 
ous implications to be drawn from the great dis¬ 
parity in financial burdens, in amount and ade¬ 
quacy of aid provided to different classes of needy 
persons, and in legislative and administrative pro¬ 
visions governing the distribution of aid in these 
116 urban areas. 


The report does not attempt a critical appraisal 
of the progress that has been made during the 
decade in adjusting an obsolete relief system to 
meet the new problems flhat have arisen, but it does 
indicate that the process of adjustment is not yet 
complete. There remain for the present decade the 
essential tasks of consolidating past gains and for¬ 
warding the development of an integrated, long- 
range program of public welfare and social security. 




I 


2 




• II • 

The Urban Series 


The urban series was initiated in 1929 by 
Ralph G. Hurlin of the Russell Sage Foundation; 
it was subsequently transferred to the United 
States Children’s Bureau, and later to the Social 
Security Board where it is now maintained as a 
current reporting project. 

The Russell Sage Foundation built up a collec¬ 
tion of monthly data for public and private relief 
agencies in 76 cities of the United States with 
populations of more than 100,000.^ As of January 
1932 the United States Children’s Bureau assumed 
responsibility for the series and expanded it to 
include other urban areas, mostly between 50,000 
and 100,000 in population. Monthly statistics 
on relief in some of these areas had been compiled 
since late in 1930 by the Children’s Bureau at 
the request of the President’s Emergency Com¬ 
mittee for Employment. For other areas monthly 
data had been collected in comiection with the 
Children’s Bureau project for the collection of 
social statistics in registration areas. A report on 
the urban series. Trends in Different Types of 
Public and Private Relief in Urban Areas, 1929-85, 
was prepared by Emma A. Winslow and published 
by the Children’s Bureau in 1937.^ 

As of July 1936 the urban relief series was 
transferred to the Social Security Board, where 
it is now maintained as a current reporting proj¬ 
ect of the Division of Assistance Analysis of 
the Bureau of Public Assistance. The content 
of the series was expanded by the Social Security 
Board to include earnings of persons employed 
under the Civil Works Program and on projects 
of the Works Progress Administration.^ Through 
the services of the regional public assistance 
^ research representatives, the data reported by all 
participating agencies were checked from the be¬ 
ginning of the series and were revised wherever 
changes appeared to be indicated. Data for the 
urban areas were published monthly in the 
Social Security Bulletin from March 1938 thi’ough 


1 Five Canadian cities were also included in the original series. 

1 Bureau Publication No. 237. 

» As of July 1, 1939, the name of this agency was changed to Work Projects 
Administration. 


September 1941 and are now issued twice a 
year. 

Description of the Areas 

The 116 urban areas represented in the present 
series are located in 36 States and the District 
of Columbia. They are listed in appendix A, 
which shows the extent of each area and its popu¬ 
lation in 1930 and 1940 (p. 47). 

Considerable variation exists among the areas 
with respect to the territory covered. Of the 116 
areas, 34, including the District of Columbia, are 
cities;^ 81 are counties® containing at least 1 city 
with 50,000 or more population; and 1 is an inde¬ 
pendent city and the surrounding county.® Six of 
the county areas—Chicago, Cleveland, Detroit, 
Los Angeles, Oakland, and Pittsburgh—cover 
territory containing more than one city of 50,000 
or more population.^ The 81 county areas vary 
widely in the proportion of the total population 
living within city limits. Some represent cities 
coextensive with the county;® some have only a 
small proportion of the total population outside 
city limits, while in others a substantial part of 
the population resides in outlying territory. 

When the urban series was originally established 
by the Russell Sage Foundation, the territory 
represented by the urban areas was in all instances 
the city. The Children’s Bureau modified certain 
of the areas to bring them into conformity with 
areas represented in the Children’s Bureau project 
for the registration of social statistics. These 
registration areas, for the most part more extensive 

‘ Four of these cities—Baltimore, Md., and Norfolk, Richmond, and 
Roanoke, Va.—are inde pendent cities having the status of counties. A fifth— 
New York City—is the combination of five counties. 

s Two of the areas—New Orleans and Shreveport, La.—represent parishes 
but are classified as counties. 

« Data for St. Louis, Mo., cover outlays made within both the city and 
county jurisdictions. 

f These 6 areas contain 19 cities of 50,000 or more population. Cook County, 
Ill., includes Chicago, Cicero, Evanston, and Oak Park; Cuyahoga County, 
Ohio, includes Cleveland, Lakewood, and Cleveland Heights;Wayne County, 
Mich., includes Detroit, Dearborn, Hamtramck, and Highland Park; Los 
Angeles Coimty, Calif., includes Los Angeles, Long Beach, Pasadena, and 
Glendale; Alameda County, Calif., includes Oakland and Berkeley; and 
Allegheny County, Pa., includes Pittsburgh and McKeesport. 

s San Francisco, Calif.; Denver, Colo.; Philadelphia, Pa.; and New Orleans, 
La. 


3 




than the city, were determined with reference to 
the territory served by the agencies participating 
in the registration project. Other areas not par¬ 
ticipating in the project were also extended to 
ensure as much comparability among areas as 
possible. It is necessary in making interarea 
comparisons to allow for differences in the nature 
of the territory covered. 

According to the Federal census of 1930, there 
were in the United States 93 cities of 100,000 or 
more population and 98 of from 50,000 to 100,000 
population. The 116 urban areas represented in 
the series embrace 83 of the cities of more than 
100,000 population and 46 of the 98 cities in the 
50,000-100,000 population group. The aggregate 
population of the 116 urban areas in 1930 was 
45,600,000, representing 37 percent of the total 
population and 66 percent of the total urban popu¬ 
lation ® of the United States, By 1940 the total 
population of the 116 reporting areas had increased 
to 49,100,000, but the proportions of the total 
population and total urban population of the 
United States represented by these areas were 
practically unchanged. Table 1 shows the dis¬ 
tribution of the urban areas and their population 
by five major geographic divisions^—^the New 
England, Middle Atlantic, North Central, South 
Atlantic and South Central, and Mountain and 
Pacific States^—^in both 1930 and 1940. The 
urban areas represented in the series comprise 
varying proportions of total and urban population 
in these geographic divisions. For example, in 
1930, in the South 18 percent of the total popula¬ 
tion and 53 percent of the urban population were 

» Under the definition used by the Bureau of the Census, the urban popu¬ 
lation represents the population of cities and other incorporated places of 
2,500 or more inhabitants. 


located in reporting areas, whereas in New England 
the reporting areas comprised 34 percent of the 
total population and 45 percent of the urban 
population. In each of the five geographic divi¬ 
sions, the ratios of the population of the reporting 
areas to the total population and the urban popula¬ 
tion changed only slightly from 1930 to 1940. 

Content of the Series 

Types of aid included in the urban series are 
public general relief, earnings under the programs 
of the Civil Works Administration and the Works 
Progress Administration, old-age assistance, aid 
to dependent children, aid to the blind, and private 
relief. The series provides a record of the most 
substantial portion of public and private aid in 
the urban areas, although data are not included 
for certain programs, described later in this chapter, 
which have contributed to the relief of distress 
during this 10-year period. For the programs 
included in the series, the data represent payments 
in cash and in kind to families and individuals 
outside public institutions.^® They do not include 
the cost of administration or, in the case of work 
programs, of materials, supplies, and other items 
incident to the operation of projects. 

A brief description of the types of aid incorpo¬ 
rated in the urban series follows. Additional in¬ 
formation concerning specific programs is given 
in later chapters of the report. 

Public general relief .—The term general relief is 
used to describe relief administered from public 
funds which are not designated for special statu¬ 
tory relief programs.General relief is variously 

10 A very small number of persons receiving old-age assistance, aid to de¬ 
pendent children, and aid to the blind are living in private institutions. 

11 Some statutory veterans’ aid granted on the basis of need is included as 
general relief. 


Table l.—ISumber and population of urban areas reporting, and percent of total population and total urban 
popu lation covered, by five geographic divisions, 1930 and 1940 * 


Geographic division 

Urban areas reporting 

Population of urban areas as percent of— ' 

Number 

Population 

Total population 

Total urban population» 

1930 

1940 

1930 

1940 

1930 

1940 

Continental United States.... 

116 

45, 557,346 

49,067,263 

37.1 

37.3 

66.1 

66.9 

New England...-- ---.. 

18 

2,808.006 

2, 794, 598 

34.4 

33.1 

44.5 

43.6 

Middle Atlantic- --- 

23 

15,059 296 

15,758, 687 

57.3 

57.2 

73.8 

74.6 

North Central- - 

36 

15,749, 426 

16,477, 579 

40.8 

41.0 

70.5 

70.3 

South Atlantic and South Central... 

29 

6. 823, 628 

8.067, 333 

18.0 

19.4 

62.9 

62.8 

Mountain and Pacific_____ 

10 

5,116,990 

A 969,066 

43.0 

43.0 

73.2 

73.4 


' 1 Based on population figures from U. S. censuses of 1930 and 1940. 

J Represents population of cities and other incorporated places of 2,500 or more inhabitants. 


4 



























referred to as poor relief, outdoor relief, general 
emergency relief, and general assistance. It is 
given to recipients in the form of cash or kind and 
may cover subsistence items, such as food, shelter, 
clothing, and household necessities, and provision 
for medical care and hospitalization. The amount 
of the general relief payment is ordinarily adjusted 
to the needs of the relief case at a given standard 
in accordance with the budget-deficit principle or 
some modification of that principle. It may be 
extended either as du'ect relief or as work relief. 

Direct relief is relief in return for which no 
systematic work has been performed by the re¬ 
cipient. Work relief is relief granted to a recipient 
who has performed work on an organized project 
in exchange for aid. The line of demarcation 
between direct and work relief in a general relief 
agency is often nebulous, since some agencies apply 
a work test or accept minor services from certain 
recipients but do not provide them with employ¬ 
ment on a systematic work program. The term 
work relief is not applied to earnings of persons 
employed on projects of the Civil Works Adminis¬ 
tration or the WPA, since earnings of such em¬ 
ployees have been determined on the basis of fixed 
wage rates and hours of employment rather than 
on the basis of the budgeted need used for work 
relief payments. 

During the decade covered by this report public 
general relief has been administered by a variety 
of agencies, among which are local poor-relief 
ofl&ces, departments of public welfare, and emer¬ 
gency relief administrations. During 1931 and 
1932 emergency relief administrations operated in 
a number of urban areas under State legislation; 
from May 1933 through 1935 such administrations 
operated under rules and regulations of the Fed¬ 
eral Emergency Relief Administration. During 
the FERA period, relief distributed by the emer¬ 
gency relief administrations was financed from 
Federal, State, and local funds. General relief 
administered by poor-law offices has been financed 
entirely from local, or from State and local, funds. 

Work 'program earnings .—The urban series 
includes earnings under two of the major work 
programs initiated by the Federal Government— 
the Civil Works Program, comprising projects of 
both the Civil Works Administration and Civil 
Works Service, and the program operated by the 
WPA. Under the Civil Works Program, which 
was a recovery as well as a relief measure, half 


of the workers were drawn from the ranks of 
the general unemployed without certification of 
need. However, these employees included many 
who would have been found eligible for aid if a 
needs test had been applied, and many such per¬ 
sons were subsequently absorbed into the general 
relief program. Operating statistics of the Civil 
Works Program did not distinguish between em¬ 
ployees drawn from relief rolls and those recruited 
from the general unemployed. The data for the 
Civil Works Program represent total earnings of 
persons employed under the program, including 
the administrative staff. 

The Works Progress Administration, which 
became the Work* Projects Administration in July 
1939, has operated since the summer of 1935. It 
finances and administers work projects for the 
employment, under an established wage scale, of 
workers certified as in need. Employment of non- 
certified persons has been limited to a small per¬ 
centage of total employment. State and local 
sponsors of WPA projects contribute funds, chiefly 
for materials and supplies, and local public agen¬ 
cies refer to the WPA persons eligible for employ¬ 
ment. Assignments to projects are made by the 
Federal agency and wages of project workers are 
paid from Federal funds. 

The data on WPA earnings represent payments 
to both certified and noncertified persons employed 
on projects operated by the WPA within the urban 
areas. Salaries of administrative personnel are 
not included. Data on earnings of persons em¬ 
ployed on projects financed by WPA funds but 
operated by other Federal agencies are not avail¬ 
able for the urban areas.^® Earnings data for 
projects operated by the WPA are not currently 
available according to the residence of employees; 
the data used are compiled according to area 
of employment. The extent to which this affects 
the comparability of the data varies from area to 
area. It should be noted also that the area cov¬ 
ered by CWA and WPA data is not always iden¬ 
tical with the urban area as defined in appendix A. 

Old-age assistance .—Prior to 1936, when Federal 
grants-in-aid for old-age assistance became avail¬ 
able under the Social Security Act, old-age 

H Data on the Civil Works Program for the continental United States 
exclude earnings of administrative staff. 

13 Total earnings derived from such projects, which have been in operation 
only since July 1938, amounted to less than $30 million for the continental 
United States during the last half of 1938. Many of the projects were continu¬ 
ations of programs operated by other Federal agencies with funds appro¬ 
priated by the Emergency Relief Appropriation Acts of 1935, 1936, and 1937. 


5 



assistance was financed entirely from State and 
local funds. States with approved plans for old- 
age assistance can now receive grants of Federal 
funds equivalent, within specified limitations, to 
half their total expenditures for cash payments to 
recipients. By the close of the decade reviewed 
here, all States were receiving such grants under 
the Social Security Act. The data on old-age 
assistance represent almost entirely cash payments 
to recipients but include some small amounts 
paid directly to persons or agencies furnishing 
medical care and/or hospitalization to recipients. 
Only unrestricted cash payments to recipients 
are matchable under the public assistance provi¬ 
sions of the Social Security Act. The data do 
not include expenditures for burial of recipients, 
which are frequently met from State and local 
funds for old-age assistance. 

Aid to dependent children .—The term aid to 
dependent children came into general use with 
the enactment of the Federal Social Security Act. 
Prior to that time, aid to dependent children was 
commonly known as mothers’ aid, mothers’ 
pensions, or aid to widows. Beginning in 1936, 
Federal grants-in-aid became available on a 
matching basis to States administering approved 
plans under the Social Security Act. By the 
close of 1938 all but 8 States containing 14 of the 
116 urban areas were receiving such grants. 

The scope of the aid to dependent children 
program has been extended since the Social 
Security Act became operative. Prior to that 
time mothers’ aid programs were generally 
restricted to children of widowed mothers. Under 
the Social Security Act, aid may be granted in 
behalf of children who have been deprived of 
parental support through death, mental or phys¬ 
ical incapacity, or continued absence from the 
home of one or both parents, and who are living 
with any one of a number of relatives within the 
second degree of relationship recognized as eligible 
to receive payments for their care. 

Data on payments to recipients of aid to 
dependent children represent almost entirely cash 
payments but include small amounts for medical 
care and hospitalization which were paid directly 
to persons or agencies supplying these seiwices to 
recipients. Only direct, unconditional money 
payments to recipients are matchable under the 

At the end of 1941 only 3 States, containing 3 of the 116 urban areas, were 
not administering approved plans. 

6 


Social Security Act. Payments for care of children 
in foster homes are not considered aid to dependent 
children and are omitted entirely from this com¬ 
pilation. Such payments represent the most 
important omission of noninstitutional aid to 
children. 

Aid to the blind .—Aid to the needy blind was 
one of the fimt types of assistance to be developed 
for a special group of needy persons in this coun¬ 
try. In 1936 Federal grants-in-aid for aid to the 
blind became available to States with plans ap¬ 
proved by the Social Security Board. At the end 
of 1938 all but 8 States containing 23 of the 116 
urban areas were participating under the act.^® 
As in old-age assistance and aid to dependent 
children. Federal funds may be used to match 
only direct, unconditional money payments to 
recipients. Aid to the blind is disbursed almost 
entirely in cash, but some payments are made 
directly to persons or agencies furnishing medical 
care and/or hospitalization to recipients. 

Private reliej .—-Alany different types of private 
or voluntary agencies administer relief, but in the 
vast majority of such agencies the relief function 
has been secondary to the service function. The 
relative importance of the service function has in¬ 
creased during the period under consideration. 
Among the private agencies disbursing relief in 
the urban areas are the nonsectarian, the Jewish 
and Catholic family societies, the American Red 
Cross, the Salvation Army, emergency relief com¬ 
mittees, and miscellaneous organizations. Emer¬ 
gency relief committees under private auspices 
were a depression phenomenon and were estab¬ 
lished as temporary agencies in the early phase of 
the unemployment crisis. Most of these emergency 
organizations were disbanded when the Federal 
Government assumed a share of the responsibility 
for the relief of dependency. Some of the emer¬ 
gency and other private organizations operated 
work relief programs, but, because of the difficulty 
of obtaining valid data, no attempt has been made 
in this report to classify expenditures from private 
funds as direct and work relief payments. 

Omitted from the data on private relief are un¬ 
organized private charity and direct assistance ex¬ 
tended by labor unions, fraternal organizations, 
private industrial and business welfare groups, 
and local church and school organizations. 

15 By the close of 1941, 2 of these States containing 6 of the 110 urban areas 
had been added to those administering approved plans. 





Programs Not Included 

Although the urban series includes the principal 
assistance and work programs operated in urban 
areas, some programs with relief attributes are 
omitted because expenditure data are not avail¬ 
able on an individual-area basis. 

Among the programs not represented in the 
series are three special programs operated by the 
FERA—the emergency education, student aid, 
and transient programs. Outlays for these pro¬ 
grams, which were concentrated in 1934 and 1935, 
were small in relation to total public and private 
aid, and omission of the data is consequently of 
slight importance. Data are likewise not available 
for transient care provided under State and local 
programs. 

Also omitted from the series is the program of 
the Civilian Conservation Corps, originally the 
Emergency Conservation Work, which has been 
in continuous existence since April 1933. The 
operations of this agency are primarily outside 
the large urban areas, and statistics on earnings 
of enrollees, many of whom have been drawn from 
urban areas, are not available according to local 
residence. Eligibility rules on this program have 
varied from time to time, but a large proportion 
of the enrollees have been selected from relief 
families and have been required to send to their 
families a substantial share of their monthly 
earnings. Thus a considerable amount of aid 
has been supplied through CCC channels to 
families living in the urban areas. 

Local data are not regularly available for the 
student aid and work programs of the National 
Youth Administration, which was established in 
1935. In view of the fact that payments to 
recipients from the creation of the agency to the 
end of 1938 amounted to $180 million for the total 
United States, it is clear that omission of these 
programs does not greatly affect the data for the 
116 urban areas. 

The omission of data on Federal surplus com¬ 


modities distributed in the 116 urban areas may 
be more significant. The Federal Surplus Com¬ 
modities Coi-poration,^® formerly called the Federal 
Surplus Relief Corporation, purchases surplus 
agricultural products as an agricultural relief 
measure. These commodities are distributed to 
needy persons and to welfare organizations, but 
the welfare objective is secondary to that of pro¬ 
viding agricultural aid. Except for data con¬ 
cerning the food stamp plan, statistics on surplus 
commodity distribution have been compiled in 
terms of quantities of goods issued rather than in 
terms of expenditures, and no data are available 
which make it possible to estimate the monthly 
value of surplus commodities distributed in the 
urban areas since the program was initiated in 
October 1933. However, such commodities are 
known to have constituted an appreciable share of 
the aid distributed in some areas, although not a 
large share of the total aid extended in the com¬ 
bined urban areas. 

The urban series differs from the integrated 
series on public assistance and Federal work 
programs published by the Social Security Board 
for the continental United States in that it does 
not include data for “other Federal agency projects 
financed from emergency funds.”*^ During the 
period under review the Federal Emergency 
Administration of Public Works, which became 
in 1939 the Public Works Administration, ac¬ 
counted for the largest share of employment on 
projects classified as “other” in the national 
series. Projects falling in this group gave em¬ 
ployment to considerable numbers of certified 
workers but also employed persons from the open 
labor market without the requirement of certifi¬ 
cation of need.** 

•• On July 1, 1940, this agency became part of the Surplus Marketing 
Administration of the Department of Agriculture. 

" For the latter, see Sociaf Security Bulletin, Vol. 4, No. 2 (February 1941), 
pp. 66-70. 

>* Whiting, Theodore E., and Woofter, T. J., Jr., Summary of Relief and 
Federal Work Program Statistics, 19SS-40, Work Projects Administration, 
1941, pp. 13-15. 


7 



• III • 

Trends in Public and Private Aid in the 
Combined Urban Areas 


The Background of Depression and 
Unemployment 

In the year 1929 began the most severe depres¬ 
sion in the history of the United States. Prevailing 
upward trends in employment and national income 
were abruptly reversed. Curtailed economic 
activity was followed promptly by widespread 
unemployment and want and by a progressive 
rise in expenditures for public and private aid to 
the needy unemployed. The cause-and-effect 
relationship between the unemployment crisis and 
the initial upward sweep in relief costs was direct 
and unmistakable. 

Relief payments moved upward with unem¬ 
ployment during 1930, 1931, and 1932 as the 
Nation watched anxiously for the end of the 
depression and a revival of economic activity 
which would bring both unemployment and relief 
back to normal levels. Unemployment, as 
measured by the subsequent estimates of several 
different authorities, reached its peak in March 
1933, but there was no immediate commensurate 
‘^drop in relief expenditures (chart 1). The cumu¬ 
lative effects of acute economic distress had not 
yet been fully registered. Instead of a diminishing 
relief problem there was compelling need for still 
greater outlays to care for the mounting burden 
of dependency caused by prolonged unemploy¬ 
ment and the gradual depletion and exhaustion of 
savings and other resources among persons who 
had at first been able to maintain themselves 
without public aid. 

The extraordinary growth in expenditures and 
other fundamental changes that have occurred in 
the relief structure since March 1933 undoubtedly 
had their impetus in the unprecedented volume of 
unemployment during the depression years. The 
estimated trend of households and persons aided 
in the continental United States followed roughly 
the estimated trend of unemployment after 1933,^ 
but the relationship between relief outlays and 

1 Work Projects Administration, Report on Progress of the WPA Program, 
June SO, im, pp. 137-138. 


economic trends was no longer simple and direct. 
More nearly adequate standards of relief payments 
and the introduction of new forms of aid through 
Federal and State programs were important factors 
influencing the course of relief expenditures in 1933 
and subsequent years. Moreover, the mere 
existence of large-scale relief programs, financed by 
public funds and with more or less well-defined 
eligibility requirements, inevitably resulted in the 
declaration of need that had existed long before the 
depression but had hitherto been ignored or met 
in very inadequate fashion by friends and relatives 
or unorganized private charity. 

The first Federal relief agency—the CCC—was 
created in April 1933, almost a month after the low 
point of the depression had been reached. Unem¬ 
ployment was near its height and national income 
payments ^ near their lowest ebb at this time 
(chart 1). Beginning in the spring of 1933 income 
payments moved slowly upward, with a brief spurt 
in 1936 reflecting veterans’ bonus payments, until 
the last months of 1937. The acute recession in 
economic activity at that time caused a temporary 
decline lasting until the middle of 1938, when 
income payments again started upward. Unem¬ 
ployment decreased slowly and irregularly over 
most of this period, with a sharp upward spurt 
from the fall of 1937 to the following summer. 
After July 1938 the unemployment series moved 
downward but at the end of the year were still well 
above their low points of 1937. 

Meanwhile, total outlays for public and private 
aid continued an irregular advance toward 1938 
peaks. They reached their highest point in the 
decade in December 1938, more than 5 years after 
the estimated peak in unemployment and 9 years 
after the first impact of the depression. 

Unemployment still loomed as the major 
economic and social problem of the Nation when 

J Estimates of national income payments indicate the flow of income to 
individuals on a monthly basis and provide a current measure of consumer 
purchasing power. They are to be distinguished from annual estimates of 
national income produced, which measure the net value of the Nation’s 
economic output. 


8 




the decade closed. Improvement in economic 
conditions had restored jobs to many millions of 

Chart 1.—Expenditures for public and private aid in 
116 urban areas as related to estimates of national 
unemployment and national income payments, Jan¬ 
uary 1929—December 1938 




MILLIONS OF DOLLARS PUBLIC AND PRIVATE AID'^t 



t Estimates of U. S. Department of Commerce, National Income Division, 
Survey of Current Business, Vol. 19, No. 10 (October 1939), table 41, pp. 16-16. 
ttBased on table C-1. 


the unemployed, but millions of new gainful 
workers had been added to the labor supply since 
1929. Accurate measures of employment and 
unemplo 3 anent do not exist, but available esti¬ 
mates all indicate that unemployment was still 
severe at the close of 1938 despite the fact that 
indexes of production, employment, and national 
income payments recorded a very substantial 
degree of recovery. 

It must be realized, of course, that not all the 
expansion in relief expenditures during the decade 
under review is attributable to increased aid to the 
needy unemployed, and that a more accurate com¬ 
parison of changes in the volume of relief with 
changes in the volume of unemployment could be 
made if it were possible to subtract assistance 
granted to unemployable persons from total pub¬ 
lic and private aid.® Unfortunately, such a sub¬ 
traction cannot even be approximated. Separate 
data are avaOable on payments under special pro¬ 
grams for certain groups of unemployable persons— 
the aged, dependent children, and the blind— 
but no basis exists for distinguishing payments to 
unemployable persons under programs for public 
general relief or private aid. 

Relation of Urban to National Trends 

The curve of public and private aid in chart 1 
relates to the 116 urban areas and not to the total 
United States, but it is believed to parallel closely 
the national trend in outlays for public and private 
aid during most, if not all, of the 10-year period. 
Comparable expenditure data are not available on 
a national scale for the first 4 years of the decade, 
but the striking similarity in national and urban- 
area trends in public aid from 1933 to the end of 
1938 is apparent from chart 2.^ The contours of 
the two trends might not be quite as similar if 
private relief and the omitted types of public aid 
could be included in both series, but the essential 
likeness would remain. 

It seems reasonable to assume that there was 

> In this report the terms “employable” and “unemployable” are used in 
their broad, commonly accepted meanings, that is, to distinguish individuals 
or groups of individuals who are capable of self-support (provided employ¬ 
ment opportunities are available) from those (young children and their 
mothers) who are not expected to maintain themselves and those who are 
seriously handicapped in the competitive labor market because of old age or 
physical or mental disability. It is obvious that many persons who are 
unemployable at a particular time within a particular economic situation are 
not unemployable in the absolute sense of being completely unable to perform 
economic activity. 

* To facilitate comparison, the two diagrams have been standardized tor 
mass; for explanation of the method used, see appendix B, p. 48. 


9 


























































































somewhat less similarity in trend from 1929 to the 
close of 1932. Private relief then formed a more 
significant share of total outlays, and local relief 
organizations were still bearing the main respon¬ 
sibility for emergency relief of the unemployed. 
Large urban areas were more immediately affected 
by the economic crisis than were other portions of 
the country, and were more likely to have organ¬ 
ized relief channels through which funds could be 
raised and the needy unemployed could make 
known their distress and receive aid. For these 
reasons, the proportion of total national aid ex¬ 
tended in the 116 urban areas was undoubtedly 
greater in the years preceding 1933 than in subse¬ 
quent years. 

Even after 1933 the proportion of total public 
aid in the 116 urban areas was considerably greater 
than the proportion of the total population living 
within those areas. Comparison of the urban- 
area expenditures with those of the total United 
States is possible only for the types of aid covered 
in chart 2, i. e., public general relief, earnings under 
the CWA and on projects of the WPA, and the 
three special types of public assistance. In 1933 
almost half—48 percent—of the total amount 
expended in the United States for these types of 
aid was distributed in the 116 urban areas, al¬ 
though the combined population of the areas in 
1930 was only 37 percent of the national total. 
The share of the national aggregate expended in 
these urban areas was even greater in subsequent 
years, reaching a maximum of 56 percent in 1936. 
In 1938 the urban areas accounted for 49 percent 
of all public outlays for these types of aid.® 

The 10-Year Bill 

Outlays in the 116 urban areas for public and 
private aid of the types included in this series 
aggregated almost $6.9 billion for the decade 
1929-38, an impressive 10-year bill for the 
alleviation of distress in areas containing less 
than two-fifths of the total population of the 
Nation. 

Much of the bill was for the relief of need 
arising directly from the economic disaster of 
the early 1930’s and may be looked upon as de¬ 
pression expenditures swelling the normal costs 
of caring for the destitute and needy in these 
areas. But there is evidence that urban relief 

5 For a discussion of the varying proportions of total outlays represented 
by the several component types of aid distributed in the 116 urban areas, see 
pp. 31-33. 


costs were in a process of expansion for many 
years before the unemployment crisis.® Even in 
1929, following an era of conspicuous business 
prosperity, the relief bill for the 116 urban areas 
exceeded $47 million. By contrast with the 
amount spent in subsequent years this sum may 
be considered a relatively small outlay. With the 
exception of 1937, each succeeding year in the 
decade saw increased outlays for total public and 
private aid. 

The $47 million spent in 1929 represents less 
than 1 percent of the aggregate outlay for the 
10-year period. Only 8 percent more of the 
aggregate was spent during the following 3-year 
period, which led to the depths of the depression 
and the entrance of the Federal Government into 
active relief operations. Nearly 36 percent was 
expended during the next 3 years, 1933-35, but 
the major portion of the $6.9 billion total, 55 
percent, was spent during the last 3 years of the 
decade. 

Trend in Total Outlays 

The irregular upward course of total monthly 
expenditures for public and private aid in the 116 
urban areas is shown graphically in chart 1; the 
aggregate monthly outlays on which the chart is 
based appear in table C-1. As a measure of total 
relief burdens the trend in combined expenditures 
is impaired somewhat by the omission of data 
for certain programs and of administrative costs 
for aU programs, but it is nonetheless an effective 
indicator of the chaiiges that have occurred in the 
amount of aid extended to the needy in these areas. 

Unfortunately, there are no data by which one 
can measure changes over the decade in the total 
volume of need existing within the areas. There 
are not even satisfactory data by which to measure 
changes in the numbers of households and persons 
whose wants were met, in varying degrees of 
adequacy, by the outlays made under the com¬ 
bined assistance and work programs. Consoli¬ 
dated data on households and persons aided, were 
they available on an unduplicated basis, would 
afford a valuable record of the proportions of the 
population of these areas receiving aid at different 
points of time, but they would not measure fluc¬ 
tuations in the volume of need. The diverse 
eligibility requirements of the different programs, 

* Geddes, Anne E., Trends in Relief Expenditures, 1910-19S6, Research 
Monograph X, Works Progress Administration, 1937. 


10 




Chart 2,—Expenditures for public aid in 116 urban areas and in the 

December 1938 • 


continental United States, January 1933— 



CIVIL WORKS 
/PROGRAM+ 


PUBLIC GENERAL RELIEF 


^SPECIAL types OF PUBLIC ASSISTANC^ 


MILLIONS OF DOLLARS 

150 


116 URBAN AREAS 


120 


MILLIONS OF DOLLARS 

150 


I 20 


1933 


1934 


1935 


1936 


1937 


1938 



MILLIONS OF DOLLARS 
300 


CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES 


250 


200 


150 


100 


MILLIONS OF DOLLARS 
300 


1 1 





CIVIL WORKS 
/ PROGRAM 







/////\ // //? 







-- 

PUBLIC GEIN 





^ r * '. . ■ ■ 1 


SPECIAL TYPES OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 


250 


200 


150 


100 


1933 


1934 


1935 


1936 


1937 


1938 


- 4 — INDICATES THE 6-YEAR MONTHLY AVERAGE 


•Tofacilitatecomparison, the two diagrams have been standardized for mass; for explanation of the method used, see app.B.p. 48. a , t 

fKarDings of all persons employed under the Civil Works Program, including the administrative staff; hence not strictly comparable with the data for 
the continental United States, whieh exclude earnings of administrative staff. 
ttEarnings on projects operated by the WPA within the areas. 


462436°—42-2 


11 










































































Table 2^~^Amount and percentage distribution of public and private assistance and earnings under specified Federal u^ork programs^ 116 urban areas^ 

1929-3S 


tn 

a 

3 

o 

s 

3 

Ph 


(£5 


a> 

u 

3 

09 

w 

CO 

CO 

CQ 

V 

2 

3 

Q. 


a 

>» 


09 

O 

o 

O. 

CQ 


M 

u 

O 

IS 

u 

o 

'3 

feS 

09 
u, 
O fcc 
73 P 


a 

3 

CO 

bO 

3 

3 

Pii; 


u, 

a 


o 

2 

13 

O) 

3 

P 

O 


P 

•3 

S.9 

-oS 


■§1 

2«2 

P 


P 
P O 

bfi 3 
P c8 

'3 w 

p 


p 

o 

Eh 


i-. p 

O p 

^ « 


CO 

|a 

.-Ph 

o 


p 

1 

M 

u 

o 


p 

ppm 

p 


o 

p 

hi 


CO 

o 

Eh 


cs 

o 


p 


p 


^ p — 

a u '3 

^ as 
Prt-i 3 

O 3 
Eh P 


3 

3 

o 

a 

<1 


CD 

o> 

CM 


O 

CO 


s 

CMO»OCOCM—igoOOiD 
^COaOb-CM-^CMcD—<05 
00CMC0C005O05OCMt>» 

CM 

t«F 

oTcd'crco^co'io'^^o 

^t-HOO.-H*.HIO>DlO^ 

^«>hidACD.-hC^CD^05 


s 

.-HOO'.^od'^CDC^i-i^Cr 

lOlOCN^i—4—< 

CD 

i-h»C' 4J*CD^»DCOCM»OCO 
0^t^»-»CD0t^0CD*'J' 
Ol>»CDt^CD^i-<00 00*0 

00 



O5'io‘4tfrc^-4CM^^O’^ 

CM 

lOCOCOi^CMcOOOUbt^FH 

lOOSCMlOt-CMOCOCMO 


t>r 

SI 

^-^c^c^cm'coco'id'cd'cio 

I 

OOOQOOt>*»0»Oi-i05t^ 

—iO»-H’.tt<COOOCOCDCO 
C0t>-05CMa5'.t*’4j.C0QC05 

cd' 

f-»05ctf—•cD'cacoToct^io' 

CO 

05 05i-HC0CMi-H00OCMCM 

CM 

t>.OOCMCO'4j<COCDCOO 

CM 

I>.05e0»0'4j<^*005t^c0 

WWCMC^CMCMCMCMCO’V 

S 

05 05C00000Ot>.t^CMlD 
OcD05U5t^4ji.-HO‘OiO 

CO 

O5C0t^C0i-^iOCMC0'^CM 

cm" 

00 Or00"cD"00*'t^Q".-» CD^IO" 

05 

CO»Ot..OCM004jiCDOO 

Ocq4^i?5o»c-^'^t^ 

CD 


i-TcTio'wb'c^— 

0 

^ ^ »-H ^ CO ID ^ 


fH ^ 



CD 

S 

S5? 

OCMo5CM05000cDOO 

i-HCOoOOOOOOO'^fCOOO 

COOOcOCMt^i-HGC'^f.— 

oT^cTocD'od'os^'^u^ 

utic^_i?q»or>-TjiSrs.CM 

eoOiDCMCMCDOOOCt^OO 

co" 

05CMi0'C0CM^O'-'»Dt^ 1 


^ CM CO ■'JiCD 05 10 05 

h- 

mm mm 1 




ic CD 
CO *C CP O 
»0 Tj* 00 00 

CO CD 00' 
UO 0> 
.-•00 CD 00 


05 CD 
CO *0 
CM 

CM"tC 

CO w 

r>. 

05 

^§5 



■^OOCMCOCDCOCOOOw 

CO 

COb*CD4jitN.05 05COCD 

t>. 

r^4t.oOt>-COCDI^OOCD 

cm" 

TjI'CMCM"^CO"'-'r^CDCr 


CMCOCDOOCDUO'^OOS 

CD 

COOOO'.tf*l^l>.COi-iS^ 


f-iCM.—'OCOCD’CM r-T 

CD 






t.. 

OOcDCOOt^-Ht>.>^t>. 

CM CD t'* 00 CM 4ti 05 CO 1 

^m 

05 

0 CM »0 CD CD .*H I—CD CO ' 

ccT 



0«-^‘D05 00«-«.—'-Vti 
rrcDt^COCO^OO'.^'CM^ 

10 

00 

cD'co'oo»o'.-i^i<‘i>»co 

»-fC0CDCD05OC005CQ 

1-4 ^ 4,J. »0 CM CM 


cm" 






s 

CM*^iOCDCOt'-COCMOO".J4 
^5 DCMi—CD—4^000505 

CD 

00t>.-.^*4t4»D00O5»OO5CO 

05 " 


00 

CMt'-i-iOO»OCDCDCOCD05 

-H 

’4j44^io0CMO0CMt^i-H4jiCD 

oT 

CDiDOt>.-H.^COOM4'^ 

1 —COO—'O'—it^OCCCM 

CM iij. CD t>-CO CM CO 

10 

0 

si 


»D 

CMCD4i}i00i-4COCOCM'4jiCM 
CM00 05 O05i0CMt^00 00 

^m 


i-HlOt^t>.»0’^00 05i-'w 

«k 

iD'-'^oTi-^oi-ro'orooor 

OOW5flOTf4CDOOOOOt>. 

CO 

*0 

tN.»OCO»O00’^'-^COi-HCO 

g' 

iDt>rcDo«5‘od'o«5'c<ro^i-4 

CO»DCMCD005l^i't'®CM 

—•CM»000 05CMO'^ 

CD 

<o" 

—1 —4 




'4t*CD05i-'C04^4,-lCM’^t>- 


CO—'t^-OO—405»0C005t^ 

CD 

C500CDO»D’^b»OC005 

cm" 

s 

•tjTo 05*'io"cm"Vcd ©“CM Wb" 

—tt>.COO»DI^CO^©0 
CMCD00i!f*iC'‘DC5O*OC0 

CO 

t^io't>^05"»o •^ocToTcm 

»o 

4tfib..t^i-HC0^©©O5CO 

00 

i-«COiO©05CMO’M4 

co" 

«i. F. «k 

^ ^m 

€•9- 



3 

O 

*3 

3 

Xi 

•M 

u 

•w 

CO 

■— 

p 

br. 

a 

*» 

3 

P 

p 

hi 

p 

a 


3.4 

CM©O^© 00 C 0 ©OQ 0 

CO © 00 »0 •-• 1-1 1^ 

CM CM CM I— 

»o 

COOCMOOiDCO^^©© 

C 5 

eOCM-H 

0 

r>-CM©©©t»©Tji 4 *ico 


10 CM* b-‘ '•ji CM cm’ CM* CO CO 

CO CM 1 -H 

o> 

‘^ 00 © 00 ©CM©CM© 

»c 

—•»D'^cm»-hco-^c 5 o 5 


©CM©CD©©-iCOCMOO 

© 

-HO 5 O 5 COt^'^©t^''?*C 0 
^ CM —4 — 4 —4 ^ 


CM 

1 < 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 50 0 © t» 

« 

llllll**** 

t 4 . 

■ 1 1 1 1 • -^ 00 00 CM 

CO 

t 1 1 > 1 I —1 © to © 

1 1 1 1 1 < 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

( 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 t 1 1 1 

1 t 1 1 I 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 t 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 I 


■III 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 © CM 1 I 1 1 

I 

1 • 

1 

1 

1 i ) 1 —1 CD 1 1 1 1 

1 1 I 1 —4 CM 1 1 1 1 

1 t I 1 1 1 t 1 

1 1 1 1 till 

• ill (lit 

1 1 i 1 1 1 t 1 

> 1 i 1 till 

■ til 1 1 1 1 

>111 1 1 1 1 

lilt 1 1 t 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 

1 t 1 1 till 

I'll lift 

CO 

—l©• 4 ^ 1 CMt>.CO©CM—< 

• 

CM CM CD © CO CO 
—• -H CM CM CM 

s 

A 

Nw" 

0^ 

1 

\ 


CO 

t-'^t>-OO- 4 jiO 0 CM ©00 

»o 

^^o 6 -^" 4 j 5 co 4 jicotc 

CO 

CO 4 tf'C 0 ©©’ 4 f©CMCM 

OD 

Sw" 

CD 1 

00 ©—•©—•I—^ 00 ©t^ 

1 

^CDi—odtOt^^OOCOtoCM 


CO'^©©t>-©t-CMCMCM 

© 

00 —i©©©CMt--HOCM 

CD 

tO©.- 4 ^ 4 jiodGO©©*© 

© 

t-t^C-OO©©©©©© 

© 

©©ooooo©©© 

« 

S 

ssssssssss 


— 4 '-H— 1 —li^^i—^ 


hi 

p 

p 


00 

CO 

05 


05 


05 O.-lCMC 0 '^»CCDrN .00 
05 COCOCOCOCOCOCOCOf 5 
05 05 05 Cb 05 05 05 05 05 05 


O 5 O*-HCMC 0 '^‘OCbt ^00 
PJCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCO 
05 05 05 ^050505050505 


9i 

P 

P 


u 

a 

•3 

3 

P 


P 

O 

0 


u 

3 

p 
P 
CQ 

'p 

•— 

P 
O 
03 

P 

>» 

X) 

73 

P 

> 

a*C 

P 3 
CO W 

3 ® 

gcQ 


3 

O 


o 

'a 


'i * 

.3 p 

P >* 

a p 

p ^ 

O . 3 
® •— 

P. 2 
im ;3 
p P 

CO ^ 

P'3 

hi P 

p 

<3 g 

p but 

2 o 


I 


P 


a o9 2 

.3 PxJ 
0.3 
■>CQ P 

S P'^ 

p^a S 

•*.* P 

■2 53 p 
«3^ = 

a g 2 

p bJD is 

P 3 P 

53S ^ 

^ P P 

CO — 

a p P 

o..i- 

«3 *^73 

CO O CO 

'§^'§ 

3 §3 

p -3 P 

32 c 

I—fCOl-H 

«Q ^ 

3 


P 3 

aS 

sa 

.9 0 
” o. 

*3 J 3 

Im •— 

^ bA 
p;=3 
p to 

hi p 

3 


73 


fli ^ 


73 

p 

^3 

3 

P 

3 


P 

CO 

3 

s 

a 

p 


M p P*W 
05 j— (i4 

u-gga 
2 I p-t 
P-^ o - 

3: p 3 a 


£33 


M CO 
tH p 

o 


p 

p-a 


3 CO 

- bX) w 
PP 

.2feM 

00 Ok 

3 


3 

o 

•— 

4.5 

P 

hi 

P 

a 

o 


3 

p 

73 

P 

3 

•— 

CO 

a 

p 


hi 

p 

.3 


73 
3 
P 

•» 

- 4 ^ 

3 

p 

a 

a 

3 

O' 

P 

13 

u 

p 

4 ^ 

P 

a 

o C 

"•S 

3 ^ 

O .fci 


73 

P 

P 

3 

o 

CO 


1.4 

p 

73 

3 

3 

3 

P 

>, 

O 

a 

a 

p 

CO 

3 

o 

CO 

hi 

p 

a 


p 

hM 

o 

CO 

3 


« 2 

p >» 

■S''§ 

^a 

3 p 

® CO 

3 3 

p O 

>*u 

a p 
ao. 

a^ 

p 

CO 
CO ^ 


3 

g 
sU 


a 

•mm 

3 


p 


P 

p 


— Q 

|g 
■“2 
a 

P 

I— ^ 
^ .« 

P CO 

Js P 


3 

O 


a 


^ L 4 

®,2 

CO ^ 

bA p 

.as 

3 P 

si 

p 

■S'® 

4^ 

o 
3 




£ 

a® . 
, £S^ 

^.2 

.rt ’rf r 4 


CO CO P — — 

4^ CO tul A 

.g-S “ = 

rt .S P P 

Brr> > 


3 
. P 


O 
3 ^ 


;2CQ S ^ 

P- 

hi 


O 

3 

O 


P 3 

P ® 
CO 


3 . 2*3 p CO 5 
p.S2.2*c3 « 2 
I 33'*^>3 3 'R® 
P Sc t> .rt ^ 

is 2 a 

a^’ 


a 
o 

a*-- bck? , 

•a ® 0,^ g^<1 g 

° §^5 35^5 

I « ^ a § fl ® ® 
§at^2” 

g g W- 

^ R, P CO 

3 p 


3 P — 

x; s 

Pa'S 


“ ja.3 

Sm **“ 

p p.p 

^ £_. p 


CO 


aS^S'S®. 

^ - bi)2 bo2^ 

”S “■5 2 D. 

l> 4 ^ o o 
































































































































































the varying standards of aid provided, and the 
shifts in emphasis among the several types of aid 
preclude any close correlation between the volume 
of need and either the numbers of households and 
persons aided or the expenditures under the com¬ 
bined programs. These same factors would lead 
one to expect marked divergence between a con¬ 
solidated trend of households and persons aided 
in the 116 urban areas and the monthly expenditure 
trend shown in chart 1. 

During most of 1929, combined monthly expen¬ 
ditures for relief in the 116 urban areas were 
at the comparatively low level of about $4 million. 
A pronounced upward shift occurred at the close 
of that year, and by March 1933, some 3 years 
later, monthly expenditures were nearly 11 times 
as large as in January 1929. Liberal wage pay¬ 
ments under the short-lived CWA resulted in a 
total bUl for January 1934 of $115.6 million, a 
sum 28 times as great as the amount for January 


1929 and 2}i times the $45 million paid out in 
March 1933. The drop from this high point was 
as sudden as the rise to it, but expenditures did 
not return to their pre-CWA level. 

The upward movement was again under way by 
the middle of 1934. The further climb to 1938 
levels was accomplished in three major advances, 
each leading to a temporary peak and subsequent 
decline in monthly expenditures. The first steep 
advance continued to January 1935. The second 
began in the fall of that year and ended in March 
1936, with a total expenditure in that month with¬ 
in $800,000 of the high point under the CWA. 
The third major advance began in the summer of 
1937 and ended in December 1938 with an outlay 
of $130.8 million, well above the highest monthly 
figure in any previous year. Thus the decade under 
review ended with a maximum expenditure for 
these 116 m’ban areas almost 32 times as great as 
that for January 1929. 



• OlKSeU UU tauie ., . ^ .l* I. rm 

fEarnings of all persons employed under the Civil Works Program, mcluding the administrative staff. 
ttEarnings on projects operated by the WPA within the areas. 


13 



































Development of Component Programs 

Viewed solely in relation to economic indexes, 
the trend of expenditures for public and private 
aid seems illogical and unpredictable. The con¬ 
spicuous lack of agreement of the relief curve with 
the trends of unemployment and national income 
payments during the latter part of the decade is 
understandable only in the light of the evolution¬ 
ary changes that have occurred in the underlying 
relief structure. A chronological account of relief 
developments since 1929 will contribute to a better 
understanding of the roles played by the various 
programs and their individual and joint effects on 
the over-all trend of expenditures. It will also 
indicate the dynamic character of the national 
relief problem and the important advances that 
were made during the decade in the treatment of 
the problem. 

Chart 3 affords a panoramic view of outlays for 
public and private aid over the entire period, re¬ 
vealing the ebb and flow of monthly payments 
under the component programs. The annual ex¬ 
penditure figures are given in table 2 and the 
monthly figures in table C-1. The 10-year picture 
is telescoped in chart 4 to show the shares of the 
aggregate outlay expended under each program 
and for each type of aid. 

Prelude to Federal participation, 1929-32.—-At 
the opening of the decade relief was still primarily 
a local responsibility, with some States participat¬ 
ing to a limited degree in providing aid to special 
classes. Contrary to popular belief, it was not a 
responsibility met primarily by voluntary con¬ 
tributions dispensed through private channels. 
Even in the largely predepression year of 1929, 
public funds paid three-fourths of the aggregate 
relief bill for these 116 urban areas. 

Considerably more than half of the public 
relief in 1929 was statutory aid to two special 
groups—dependent children and the blind. The 
lesser share was for general poor relief dispensed, 
for the most part, by local overseers of the poor 
or county commissioners in accordance with anti¬ 
quated poor-relief laws. Such relief was granted 
to destitute employable persons as well as unem¬ 
ployable persons not eligible for existing forms of 
categorical relief, but it carried with it a label of 
pauperism and a distinct social stigma. Some of 
the local poor laws imposed a pauper’s oath and 
required apphcants to waive certain political and 
civil rights as a prerequisite to receiving aid. 


Public relief agencies were ill-equipped, both 
administratively and financially, to meet the 
initial impact of the unemployment crisis, and it 
was natural, therefore, that families faced with 
sudden economic distress should turn to private 
agencies for relief and care. As early as the late 
autumn of 1929 private social agencies began to 
feel the increasing burden of need. Public relief 
costs also began to expand during these first 
months of the depression but at a somewhat 
slower rate. 

The strain on both private and public resources 
increased as the months passed and the depression 
became more acute. Local governments were 
faced with dwindling resources and a widening 
gap between demands for assistance and their 
ability to meet those demands. Many local 
governments were hampered by statutory limita¬ 
tions on the taxation of real estate, the chief source 
of local revenue, and nearly all were affected by 
declining property values and mounting tax 
delinquencies. Under the growing burden of dis¬ 
tress, current revenues were soon exhausted and 
localities were forced to borrow funds. 

Demands for assistance, far from abating, 
became more numerous and more urgent, over¬ 
taxing completely the resources of existing relief 
mechanisms. Gradual recognition of the disaster 
proportions of the unemployment crisis led to 
the creation in October 1930 of the President’s 
Emergency Committee for Employment, and in 
August 1931 of the President’s Organization on 
Unemployment Relief. Under the stimulus of 
these groups, local committees were formed in most 
of the larger urban areas to devise temporary means 
of helping the imemployed. Recovery, like pros¬ 
perity, was then assumed to be “just around the 
corner,” and stopgap measures rather than long¬ 
time relief policies engaged the attention of 
these committees. Reemployment and make-work 
drives of all kinds were launched in an endeavor 
to check the further spread of unemployment and 
to hasten the expected economic revival. City¬ 
wide relief campaigns, directed by prominent 
citizens, were organized to raise funds for the 
destitute unemployed. 

The upward spurt in private relief outlays in 
the winter of 1930-31 reflects the valiant efforts 
of these emergency committees to meet the rising 
volume of need among the urban unemployed. 
In the winter of 1931-32 voluntary contributions 


14 


Chart 4 .—Percentage 


11 

'■V 


PUBLIC 
ASSISTANCE 
AND EARNINGS 

96.6% 


PRIVATE RELIEF 

3.4% 


flistribiition of $6,853 million expended for public and private aid, 116 urban areas, 1929-38 ‘ 


EARNINGS ON 
WORK PROGRAMS 
AND 

WORK RELIEF 

50.9% 


DIRECT 

assistance 

49.1% 


C 



EARNINGS ON PROJECTS 
OPERATED BY THE WPA 
37.2% 


EARNINGS UNDER THE 
CIVIL WORKS PROGRAM 

4.4% 


WORK RELIEF 

9.3% 


PUBLIC 

V GENERAL RELIEF 


DIRECT RELIEF 

35.3% 


44.6% 


AID TO THE BLIND 

5% 

AID TO DEPENDENT 
CHILDREN 

4.0% 

OLD-AGE ASSISTANCE 

5.9% 


PRIVATE -RELIEF 
3.4% 


SPECIAL TYPES OF 
PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 

10.4% 


I Based on table 2. 


15 


























































to emergency relief campaigns were even greater 
in amount, but private relief funds represented a 
distinctly smaller share of the total relief outlays. 
By January 1932 monthly expenditures from 
private funds had reached their peak for the decade 
and thereafter declined rapidly, both in actual 
amount and as a percentage of total expenditures 
for aid in the 116 urban areas. From a maximum 
proportion of 29 percent in 1931 they shrank by 
1935 to about 1 percent of aggregate outlays. 

Continued expansion in public relief outlays 
during the winter of 1931-32 was made possible 
only by a gradual shift in financial responsibility 
from local to State governments. Fourteen 
States, containing 65 of the 116 urban areas, 
passed special legislation in 1931 providing funds 
for the needy unemployed. Four other States, 
containing 9 of the urban areas, voted their first 
appropriation for unemployment relief in 1932.^ 

The initial move toward Federal participation 
in relief financing was made in July 1932, when the 
Emergenc}^ Relief and Construction Act was 
passed, authorizing the Reconstruction Finance 
Corporation to make loans to the States and local 
subdivisions for relief purposes.® Two years later 
State obligations under this act were canceled 
by congressional action,® so that Federal funds 
for unemployment relief actually became avail¬ 
able with the negotiation of the first RFC loans 
for relief purposes. Earlier in 1932 Federal funds 
had been used to purchase large quantities of 
surplus wheat and cotton which were distributed 
to needy families through the facilities of the 
American Red Cross, but this measure was pri¬ 
marily designed for farm and not unemployment 
relief.'® 

' For dates of first legislation financing unemployment relief in the various 
States, see Lowe, Robert C., Digest of State Legislation for the Financing of 
Emergency Relief, January 1,19Sl-June 30, 19SB, Municipal Finance Section, 
Federal Emergency Relief Administration; and Lowe, Robert C., and staff. 
Supplement for Period July 1, 1935-February 29, 1936, Division of Social 
Research, Works Progress Administration. 

* The Reconstruction Finance Corporation was established on January 22, 
1932, to make emergency loans to agricultural, commercial, and industrial 
enterprises, but its powers were extended and broadened by subsequent 
legislation. 

« Funds made available to the States for relief purposes were considered 
advances on grants for public roads; required deductions from future grants 
were waived by congressional action on June 18,1934. Loans made to local 
jurisdictions were secured by bond issues; outstanding balances of such loans 
were canceled by congressional action on Feb. 24,1938. 

10 The total amount expended by the Federal Government for the purchase, 
processing, and distribution of surplus wheat and cotton in 1932 and 1933 was 
$73,598,452. See American Red Cross, The Distribution of Government-Owned 
Wheat and Cotton, June 1, 1934, pp. 80-83. Expenditure data for the 116 
urban areas do not include the value of surplus wheat or cotton distributed 
in those areas, or the value of surplus commodities distributed after October 
1933 by the Federal Surplus Relief Corporation and its successor agencies. 


The RFC loans afforded a new source of funds 
for harassed States and localities and sustained the 
upward trend in relief expenditures in the face of 
an increasingly critical relief situation. It was 
obvious by the end of the year, however, that 
more direct Federal action was necessary. The 
bonus march to Washington in 1932 had helped to 
focus attention on the plight of the unemployed 
and to crystallize public opinion in favor of some 
Federal action to combat the widespread unem¬ 
ployment and distress caused by a major break¬ 
down in the national economy. In the depth of 
the depression, with unemployment near its peak 
for the decade, the Congress acted to establish a 
Nation-wide emergency relief program under 
Federal auspices. 

Emergency reliej measures under Federal aus¬ 
pices, 1933-35 .—The first Federal Emergency 
Relief Act was approved by the President on 
May 12, 1933." It appropriated funds for a com¬ 
prehensive program of direct and work relief to be 
administered by the States and localities in coop¬ 
eration with the Federal Government. The 
FERA was created, with a 2-year span of existence, 
and the administrator was authorized to make 
grants-in-aid to the States for relief purposes and 
to prescribe such rules and regulations as would 
ensure their effective and efficient use. Later acts 
extended the life of the program and financed 
Federal grants totaling more than $3 billion by 
the end of 1935. 

Certain basic policies governing Federal par¬ 
ticipation in emergency relief activities that were 
laid down in connection with the FERA have had 
far-reaching effects on the relief structure. Nota¬ 
ble among these policies were the use of matching 
and discretionary grants of Federal funds, the 
acceptance of work projects as a form of Federal 
aid, the differentiation of programs to meet 
special needs, and the insistence that Federal 
funds be expended only through public agencies 
and in accordance with established minimum 
standards and broad policy regulations. 

The act itself made it clear that Federal aid was 
to supplement and not displace State and local 
support of emergency relief activities. The first 
grants were made on a matching basis, in the ratio 
of $1 of Federal funds for every $3 of public funds 
expended within the State during the previous 3 

» The Emergency Conservation Work, known later as the Civilian Con¬ 
servation Corps, was established a month earlier to provide training and 
useful work for unemployed young men. 


16 





months. Unmatched grants were to be made 
when State resources plus available matching 
funds were found by the administrator to be 
insufficient to meet existing need. State emer¬ 
gency relief administrations were required to 
assume responsibility for the expenditure of Fed¬ 
eral funds through local emergency relief adminis¬ 
trations or other public agencies. The turning 
over of funds to private agencies was strictly pro¬ 
hibited after August 1, 1933. 

FERA regulations sought to limit the use of 
Federal emergency funds to the relief of hardship 
and distress caused by unemployment and forbade 
their use for institutional care or for aid to special 
classes and other normal welfare activities of the 
States and local subdivisions. Payments were not 
restricted to employable persons, however, and aid 
was extended under the direct relief program to 
large numbers of unemployable persons when the 
States and localities were unable to finance assist¬ 
ance to such persons. At the same time emphasis 
was placed on the development of work projects 
that would afford useful employment to able- 
bodied relief applicants. 

The preponderant share of emergency relief was 
extended under the broad dual program of direct 
and work relief, but several minor programs were 
devised to meet the special needs of certain rela¬ 
tively small groups of dependent persons. Two of 
these programs, rural rehabilitation and student 
aid, were subsequently transferred to other Fed¬ 
eral agencies; the emergency education program 
was eventually brought within the scope of the 
diversified Federal work program that succeeded 
the FERA. The FERA transient program was 
discontinued; some transients obtained employ¬ 
ment on WPA projects and others were given 
transportation to their place of legal settlement or 
received assistance under State and local general 
relief programs.^^ 

The first grants of FERA funds were made on 
May 23, 1933, and served to maintain relief ex¬ 
penditures at prevailing levels. A gradual rise 
in average payments was effected during these early 
months of Federal participation in relief activities, 
counterbalancing in part a temporary, seasonal 
decline in relief loads. Improvement in standards 
was manifest not only in higher average payments 
but in the greater emphasis on work relief and the 

•• The urban series does not include data for any of the FERA special 
programs. 


encouragement given to payment of benefits in 
cash instead of in kind. 

The early work relief program of the FERA 
focused, for the most part, on small-scale projects, 
many of which had been initiated under State 
or local auspices prior to the FERA. Projects 
were of short dmation and confined largely to the 
performance of unskilled work. A policy of “fair” 
or “prevailing” wage rates was established, but 
monthly earnings were intended to be related to 
the budget deficit of the relief family in the same 
manner as direct relief payments. 

By November 1933 the decision had been 
reached to launch a new and intensive program 
of public works which would provide more jobs 
on more useful projects and at the same time speed 
recovery by releasing purchasing power to millions 
of unemployed. 

The Federal Civil Works Program was created 
by an executive order issued November 9 under 
authority of title II of the National Industrial 
Recovery Act.^® The program was designed as a 
bold offensive against the depression and the con¬ 
tinuing burdens of unemployment and relief, and, 
unlike the FERA, was federally administered. An 
employment goal of four million was set for the 
new program. Approximately two million persons 
were to be transferred directly from the general 
relief rolls. Another two million were to be hired 
from the general ranks of the unemployed without 
the imposition of any test of destitution or need. 
Wages and hours on CWA jobs were to be the 
same as those on regular public works projects 
administered by the Public Works Adminis¬ 
tration.^^ Earnings of employees were not to be 
linked to their budgetary needs but to the kind 
and quantity of work performed. 

The wholesale transfer of needy employable 
persons from FERA work projects to CWA jobs 
took place almost overnight. The shift from 
subsistence wages to regular earnings obviously 
meant a sudden rise in the standard of living for 
some two million relief families; it meant also 
a precipitous rise in public outlays for their care. 

n This act was passed in June 1933 and authorized the appropriation of 
$3,300 million “to encourage national industrial recovery, to foster fair compe¬ 
tition, and to provide for the construction of certain useful public works, and 
for other purposes.” 

n The Federal Emergency Administration of Public Works (PWA) had 
been established in June 1933 to help direct the extended program of normal 
public works authorized by the National Industrial Recovery Act. These 
projects were let by contract to private employers, wages were at prevailing 
rates, hours of work were normal, and employees were hired in the open labor 
market. 


17 




Still greater advances in costs were incurred by 
the hhing of about two million unemployed 
persons not in receipt of public aid at the time 
of employment. Within the span of a few weeks 
the rate of outlay for relief and earnings was more 
than doubled. Expenditures in the 116 urban 
areas rose by 188 percent between October 1933 
and January 1934. In the latter month CWA 
monthly earnings reached a maximum of $85.4 
million and accounted for nearly three-fourths of 
a record total expenditure of $115.6 million for 
public and private aid in these areas. The heav^'’ 
burden of CWA wages was maintained for only 
a brief time. Reductions in hours and pay rolls 
were ordered almost as soon as employment goals 
were reached, and the progi'am was officially 
terminated as of the close of March 1934. Out¬ 
lays for CWA dropped abruptly, and with them 
total outlays for relief and earnings. 

Suspension of the CWA was followed by the 
creation of an Emergency Work Relief Program 
within the general relief programs of the State and 
local emergency relief administrations. Outlays 
for work relief under the FERA had been curtailed 
almost to the vanishing point during the CWA, 
but direct relief expenditures had continued to 
expand. With the suspension of CWA operations 
at the end of March, eligible persons on the pay 
rolls were ordered transfeiTed to the Emergency 
Work Relief Program. New employees were to 
be accepted only on proof of need, and wages for 
all employees were to be regulated strictly in 
accordance with budgetary needs. With the 
renewed emphasis on emergency work relief proj¬ 
ects and the continued expansion of the direct relief 
burden, general relief outlays once more dominated 
the emergency relief structure and the Federal 
Government continued to be a dominant factor 
in the financing and supervision of the general 
relief program. 

FERA and other general relief outla 3 ''s were at 
their maximum in January 1935 when the Presi¬ 
dent, in his annual message to Congress, voiced 
the need for a reallocation of the responsibilities 
for public aid. Declaring that “work must be 
found for able-bodied but destitute workers” and 
that “the Federal Government must and shall 
quit this business of relief,” he proposed a definite 
separation of the two tasks of providing work for 
the unemplo 3 ’'ed and relief for other classes of 
dependent persons. Responsibility for the fii’st 


was placed squarely on the Federal Government. 
Responsibility for the second, it was insisted, 
must be returned to the States and localities, with 
such Federal participation as might be provided 
through the permanent social security legislation 
then pending. 

A joint resolution of Congress on April 8, 1935, 
laid the legislative ground work for the contem¬ 
plated change in Federal policy, and on May 6, 
1935, an executive order was issued creating the 
WPA. This new Federal agency was charged 
with primary responsibility for organizing a broad 
work program to furnish employment at security 
wage levels for able-bodied workers then on 
relief roUs of the FERA and such others as later 
became destitute. Various permanent and newly 
created agencies participated in the new program, 
but projects operated directly by the WPA 
through State and local administrations have 
afforded by far the greatest volume of employ¬ 
ment and earnings.’® 

Persons referred by local emergency relief 
administrations as eligible for employment were 
assigned to WPA jobs at fixed monthly wages, 
without regard to varying family needs. Employ¬ 
ment was at prevailing wage rates, with hours, of 
work adjusted to yield an established security 
wage. WPA earnings have been graduated ac¬ 
cording to the skill of the worker and the loca¬ 
tion of the project, but in general they have 
provided a standard of family living far above the 
subsistence scale authorized under the FERA 
program. 

The transfer of eligible workers to WPA jobs 
began in August 1935 and proceeded rapidly 
during the next few months. By December, 
FERA emergency work relief was reduced to a 
small fraction of its former volume and direct 
relief had been severely curtailed in the face of 
imminent withdrawal of Federal support. 

The last Federal grants were determined in 
December 1935, and at the close of that year the 
FERA ceased to function as an active relief 
agency. The WPA replaced it as the main 
channel of Federal aid to the unemployed, and the 
State and local agencies were forced to take over 
the burden of direct relief to needy unemploy¬ 
able persons. The only Federal funds available 
for direct relief were some unexpended balances 

The urban series does not include earnings on projects other than those 
operated by the WPA. 


18 




of gi-ants determined before January 1, 1936.'® 
Federal assistance in the financing of special 
types of assistance was promised under the Social 
Security Act, which had been approved in August 

1935. Congress did not at that time appropriate 
the necessary funds, but matching grants-in-aid 
were to become available early in the following 
year to States with public assistance plans ap¬ 
proved by the Social Security Board. 

Beginnings of a Federal security 'program, 1936- 
38 .—Since the end of 1935 the composition of 
the m-ban relief structure has not been altered 
by any major shifts in legislation or administrative 
policy, but it has undergone marked changes of an 
evolutionary nature. The enactment of the 
Social Security Act caused no immediate trans¬ 
formation in the composite relief pattern, but 
it instituted vital changes that gathered momen¬ 
tum in subsequent years. 

The public assistance provisions of the act 
became operative in February 1936” and stimu¬ 
lated a prompt expansion in old-age assistance, 
aid to dependent children, and aid to the blind 
in the urban areas. The availability of Federal 
grants-in-aid hastened the spread of new State 
legislation for these forms of assistance and en¬ 
couraged broader coverage and higher payments 
under laws already in operation. The public as¬ 
sistance curve moved upward at an accelerated 
rate during 1936 and contributed materially to 
the over-all rise in relief outlays during the last 
3 years of the decade under consideration. 

The Federal work program under WPA con¬ 
tinued to expand during the opening months of 

1936. WPA earnings in the urban areas mounted 
each month until March 1936, when they aggre- 

i gated more than two-thirds of the combined ex¬ 
penditures for public and private aid. During the 
balance of the decade they fluctuated with eco¬ 
nomic conditions and available funds but suffered 

I no serious diminution in relative importance. 

>6 For the country af a whole such balances were relatively unimportant, 
but in some States where State and/or local fimds were extremely limited 
they were the source of a substantial share of general relief expenditures during 
part or all of 1936. 

17 Other provisions of the Social Security Act that may be expected to 
influence expenditure trends for public and private aid include the Federal 
grants to States for maternal and child health and welfare services, public 
health and vocational rehabilitation, and the broad insurance programs set 
up for unemployment compensation and old-age and survivors’ benefits. 
Payments under State unemployment compensation laws began in Wisconsin 
in July 1936 but in no other States until 1938; monthly benefits imder the 
federally operated old-age insurance system first became payable in January 
1940. The Railroad Retirement Act, approved August 29, 1935, provided 
I for a federally operated retirement system for aged and disabled railroad 
I workers; benefits under this system were first paid in July 1936. 


They continued to represent, as chart 3 shows, 
the largest single component of the relief structure. 
Successive appropriation acts modified the scope 
and conditions of employment on work projects 
but made no fundamental change in the objec¬ 
tives or basis of extending aid. Improvement in 
economic conditions during 1936 and the first half 
of 1937 permitted a sharp retrenclunent in WPA 
operations. This decline was cut short in the fall 
of 1937, when a slump in general economic condi¬ 
tions forced an expansion in WPA employment to 
counteract the effects of a sharp contraction in 
private pay rolls. 

After 1935, public general relief declined ma¬ 
terially in volume with the substitution of other 
forms of public aid and the decentralization of 
fiscal and administrative responsibility. Never¬ 
theless, it remained a major component of the 
relief structure. Despite the removal of millions 
of needy employable persons to work programs 
and the absorption of millions of needy unem¬ 
ployable persons in a permanent public assistance 
program, general relief continued to absorb almost 
a fourth of annual outlays for public and private 
aid in the 116 urban areas. Most of this amount 
was dispensed as direct relief payments, scaled to 
meet the needs of those accepted for care at the 
levels recognized by general relief agencies and 
in many instances failing to reach even those levels. 

Private relief had by 1936 been stabilized at 
approximately predepression levels and was sub¬ 
sequently a small, although dependable, contribu¬ 
tor to relief expenditures in these 116 areas. 

Developments under the insurance provisions 
of the Social Security Act undoubtedly played a 
part in shaping relief trends in the last year of the 
decade. During that year, unemployment bene¬ 
fits first became payable to workers in 30 States 
qualifying under unemployment compensation 
laws set up under the provisions of the Social 
Security Act. These States, together with Wis¬ 
consin, which began payments in 1936, contain 88 
of the 116 urban areas. There is no way of know¬ 
ing how many persons in these urban areas were 
kept off relief and WPA rolls by the receipt of 
unemployment benefits during 1938, but it is 
certain that the total expenditures shown in both 
charts 1 and 3 would have risen even higher if the 
unemployment compensation program had not 
been in existence. 

18 Including the District of Columbia. 


19 







Trends of Component Types of Aid 

With the relief pattern of the decade spread 
before us, the trends in expenditures for compon¬ 
ent types of aid can be viewed in their proper set¬ 
ting as interrelated elements of the composite 
relief trend. But changes in the relief pattern 
have a qualitative significance far beyond their 
effect on the total cost of public and private aid. 
A shift in emphasis from one type of aid to another 
may make little difference in the composite relief 
trend but a vast difference in the amount and kind 
of aid provided for different classes of needy per¬ 
sons. The previous section has directed attention 
to the interplay among programs and the major 
economic, legislative, and administrative changes 
that have influenced relief trends; the present 
section traces the net effects of these changes on 
each of the component types of aid. 

Private relief .-—Three years after the decade 
opened, the monthly outlay for private relief in 
these 116 urban areas was more than 8 times the 
$1.1-million outlay of January 1929; 3 years later, 
the average monthly outlay was not far above the 
$l-million level of predepression months. The 
expansion in public aid has reduced these outlays 
to an insignificant proportion of the total expendi¬ 


tures for public and private aid in these areas, 
but it has not led, as many persons feared it might, 
to a disappearance of private charity or to a 
serious decline of expenditures below predepres¬ 
sion levels. Aside from the first few years of the 
depression, when emergency relief campaigns 
pushed private relief expenditures far above former 
levels, public agencies have assumed all the added 
burden of aid in these urban areas, but they have 
not conspicuously lightened the load borne by 
private organizations. 

The sharp ups and downs in the private relief 
curve dirring the critical years of 1930-33 are 
shown in chart 5. They reflect the prompt and 
generous response of private citizens to the emer¬ 
gency relief drives and reveal also the marked 
concentration of private expenditures in the winter 
months when relief needs were greatest. 

Public general relief .—The trend of public 
general relief over this period, as shown in chart 6, 
is closely linked to the evolution of Federal policy 
concerning unemployment relief measures. In a 
very real sense, general relief is a residual element 
in the public relief structure and hence reflects any 
major changes that occur in the provisions for 
other types of aid. 


Chart 5 .—Expenditures for private reliefs 116 urban areas, January 1929-December 1938 ^ 



20 









































Until the fall of 1933 public general relief shared 
with private relief the task of caring for the 
growing volume of need caused by unemployment. 
Part of the expansion that occurred during these 
years in the cost of old-age assistance, aid to 
dependent children, and aid to the blind was a 
secondary result of unemployment and reduced 
income among relatives formerly responsible for 
the care of such dependent persons, but these 
special types of assistance were not an important 
factor in the emergency relief situation since they 
were not intended to provide aid to needy employ¬ 
able persons. 

State and local funds, augmented in 1932 by 
RFC loans, supported almost a twenty-six-fold 
increase in monthly outlays for public general 
relief in these areas from January 1929 to March 
1933, 2 months before Federal funds were made 
available for grants under the FERA general 
relief program. Total general relief outlays were 
fairly stable in the initial period of operation under 
the FERA program, but there was a further up¬ 
ward shift in the relative importance of work 
relief, which had formed a minor, although steadily 
increasing, part of the emergency relief dispensed 
by the States and localities. During the summer 
months of 1933 work relief payments represented 


about one-third of the general relief extended in 
these urban areas. 

Establishment of the CWA brought the work 
relief phases of the FERA to a virtual halt and 
caused an immediate slump in the general relief 
curve from $37 million in November 1933 to $25 
million in January 1934. Curtailment of the 
CWA and inauguration of the Emei^ency Work 
Relief Program within the FERA soon reversed 
the decline and set in motion a strong upward 
movement that carried general relief outlays to $80 
million in January 1935, the peak for the decade. 
This figure represented a rise of only 113 percent 
above the highest monthly outlay prior to the 
first FERA grants, but a fifty-six-fold increase 
from the first month of 1929. 

A decline in general relief outlays beginning in 
the first half of 1935 was accelerated thereafter by 
the decision of the Federal Government to end its 
support of general relief and confine its participa¬ 
tion in unemployment relief to the provision of 
jobs for the able-bodied unemployed through the 
WPA and related work programs. From the 
beginning of 1936 public general rehef again be¬ 
came a function solely of the States and localities, 
although it was the intention of the Federal 
Government to limit State and local responsibility 


Chart 6 .—Expenditures for public general relief, 116 urban areas, January 1929-December 1938 ^ 

MILLIONS OF DOLLARS MILLIONS OF DOLLARS 

100 



60 


20 


21 




































to the care of dependent persons unable to work. 
The intended removal of employable persons from 
the realm of public general relief, however, was 
only partially effective. Limited WPA funds, 
coupled with the administrative difficulties of 
obtaining sponsorship for and maintaining suitable 
projects in every locality for the employment of all 
eligible applicants, left a varying but always large 
number of able-bodied unemployed dependent on 
public general relief for such assistance as the 
States and localities could or would provide. 

The drop in general relief outlays in the 116 
urban areas after the withdrawal of Federal sup¬ 
port was substantial but relatively less than in the 
United States as a whole. From December 1935, 
when the last Federal grants were determined, to 
the low point in relief outlays preceding the 1937 
recession in economic activity, public general relief 
payments in the 116 urban areas declined by 39.6 
percent as compared with a 48.5-percent drop for 
the total United States. 

By the close of the decade the monthly outlay 
for public general relief in these urban areas was 
back to the $27-million level it had reached at the 
end of 1932, and general work relief was reduced 
to a position of relative unimportance. 

The varying importance of public general relief 
in the total relief pattern for these areas is indicated 
by the annual percentage distributions in table 2, 
which shows it to have ranged widely during the 
decade between a minimum of 23 percent and a 
maximum of 78 percent of the combined annual 
outlays for public and private aid. 

Special types of public assistance .—Unlike other 
forms of aid, the special types of public assist¬ 
ance—old-age assistance, aid to dependent chil¬ 
dren, and aid to the needy blind—have followed an 
almost unbroken upward trend since 1929.^® 
These forms of relief were relatively insensitive to 
the early impact of the unemployment crisis, and 
short-time emergency measures have played no 
direct part in their financing or administration. 
The depression undoubtedly hastened the spread 
of enabling legislation and led to a higher incidence 
of dependency among the special classes eligible for 
these forms of relief. But expansion in case loads 
and expenditures has been predicated on specific 

i» During 1933 and 1934 there was a temporally slump in old-age assistance 
and aid to dependent children presumably induced by a shortage of State and 
local funds and the consequent shifting of cases to FERA relief rolls. See 
Geddes, Anne E., Trends in Relief Expenditures, 1910-1935, op. cit., p. 37 and 
footnote 69. 


legislative provisions and hence has been more 
orderly and sustained than for other types of aid. 

It must be remembered that not all special types 
of assistance were extended in all the urban areas 
during the period under review. In 1929 aid to 
dependent children, or mothers’ aid as it was then 
more commonly called, was provided in all but 12 
of the 116 urban areas, but aid to the blind was 
provided in only 60 areas and old-age assistance 
in only 2. When statutory provision for a special 
type of aid was lacking, or when funds were inade¬ 
quate to care for all eligible applicants, all or part | 
of the burden of caring for these special classes of 
dependents devolved on the general relief agen- j 
cies. The expenditure trend for the special types 
of public assistance is therefore a poor measure of 
the amount of aid distributed among these groups 
of needy persons during the early years of the 
decade. 

By January 1936, the month before the first 
Federal grants were made to States participating 
under the Social Security Act, the combined ex¬ 
penditures for the three types of special assistance 
were already 260 percent above the January 1929 
level. During the next 3 years expansion in out¬ 
lays was far more rapid, resulting in an increase 
during the decade of more than 1,000 percent in 
these 116 urban areas. Most of this increase must 
be attributed to the spread of enabling legislation 
and the improvement in standards stimulated by 
the Federal matching-grant procedure of the Social * 
Security Act. 

The upward trend in outlays for the special 
types of public assistance was less pronounced in 
the 116 urban areas than in the Nation as a whole. 
In 1933 special assistance payments in the urban 
areas represented almost three-fifths of all such 
outlays in the United States; in 1938 they were 
less than two-fifths of the national total. 

Although changes in the emergency relief struc- - 
ture caused little fluctuation in the trend of special 
assistance payments, they caused marked fluctua-' 
tion in the relative importance of these forms of, 
relief in the total relief structure. In 1929, despite' 
the limited geographic coverage of old-age assist¬ 
ance and aid to the blind, special assistance pay¬ 
ments accounted for 41 percent of the total out¬ 
lays for public and private aid in the 116 urban 
areas. With the precipitous rise in emergency 
relief expenditures this percentage dropped to less 
than 5 percent in 1934. After the passage of the* 


22 







Chari 7 .—Expenditures for special types of public assist- 



1 Based on table C-1. 


Social Security Act the special types of public 
assistance regained part of their former relative 
importance and in 1938 accounted for 14 percent 
of total outlays for relief and work program earn¬ 
ings in these urban areas. 

An extraordinary growth in old-age assistance 
has been the dominant factor in the rise of the 
special assistance curve. During 1929 combined 
outlays for statutory old-age assistance in the 116 
urban areas averaged less than $750 a month, as 
contrasted with nearly $1.5 million for aid to de¬ 
pendent children and $130,000 for aid to the 
blind. By the end of 1938 monthly outlays for 
old-age assistance were more than $12 million, for 
aid to dependent children about $4 million, and 
for aid to the blind $700,000. The separate ex¬ 
penditure curves for the three types of special 
assistance are shown in chart 7. 

Earnings under Federal work 'programs .—-The 
Federal work program is a development of the 
decade under review. It originated as an emer¬ 
gency measure to provide useful jobs instead of 
a dole to the millions of able-bodied workers 
temporarily deprived of means of self-support, and 
it has not yet acquired a permanent status in the 
structure of public aid.^ The gap between CWA 
and WPA (chart 3) emphasizes the experimental 
character of this new form of aid for the unem- 

*0 Except the CCC, which received direct appropriations from regular 
Federal funds from July 1936 until its liquidation beginning July 1942. 


ployed and the unsettled public policy behind it. 

The CWA program was intended as a recovery 
as well as an assistance measure. In an effort to 
“prime the pump,” employment and earnings on 
this program were brought to maximum points 
within 2 months after issuance of the executive 
order which created the Federal Civil Works 
Administration. At their peak in January 1934, 
earnings under the program totaled $85 million 
in the 116 urban areas and made up almost three- 
fourths of the montlily bill for public and private 
aid. Work program earnings declined rapidly in 
amount and relative importance during the next 
6 months and, with the exception of CCC wages 
and earnings under “other Federal agency projects 
financed from emergency funds,” disappeared 
entirely for a 12-month period in 1934 and 1935. 
During this period work relief was revived and 
expanded through the development of the Emer¬ 
gency Work Relief Program of the FERA, under 
which many of the projects initiated under the 
CWA were continued. 

The Federal work program was restored to an 
important place in the relief structure in 1935 
with the establishment of the WPA and the 
appropriation of funds for the operation of work 
projects by other Federal agencies. From the 
end of that year through 1938, monthly earnings 
on projects operated by the WPA exceeded the 
combined outlays for all other forms of aid in the 
116 urban areas. Because of its purpose of com¬ 
plementing private employment, the WPA pro¬ 
gram has been the most responsive to the ups and 
downs of economic activity. After the initial 
organization period, earnings remained fairly 
stable at about the $70-million level until near the 
close of 1936. A slow decline began at that time 
and continued until the fall of 1937, when the 
economic recession caused a reversal in the down¬ 
ward movement. A new wave of unemployment 
distress carried montlily earnings well above 
former levels and 93 percent above the $45-mil- 
lion low of August 1937. The peak of $87 million 
was reached in October 1938, 2 months before 
the 10-year peak in total outlays for public and 
private aid. 

As a proportion of total annual outlays in these 
areas, work program earnings ranged from nothing 
in the first 4 years of the decade to more than 
two-thirds during 1936. Of the national outlays 

See p. 7. 


23 








































for work program earnings, the 116 urban areas 
have received a varying share. Under the Civil 
Works Program these areas accounted for only 
two-fifths of such earnings in the United States; 
under WPA-project operations they accounted 
for one-half to three-fifths of the annual national 
totals. 

Underlying Shifts in the Relief Structure 

Some of the major alterations that have been 
made in the urban relief structure since 1929 are 
not apparent from charts showing the divergent 
trends of expenditures for the component pro¬ 
grams. Other break-downs of the data are 
needed to emphasize the underlying shifts in 
financial and administrative responsibility and the 
methods of extending aid to needy individuals. 

Shift in financial burdens .—The diminishing 
share of the bill for assistance and earnings paid 
from private funds has already been noted. 
Reaching 29 percent in 1932, the proportion of 
expenditures from private funds in these 116 ur¬ 
ban areas dropped to 1 percent or less during the 
last 3 years of the decade. In rural communities 
and smaller cities the proportion of private relief 
was probably even lower at the beginning as well 
as the end of the 10-year period.Public funds 
provided three-fourths of the aid extended in the 
combined urban areas in 1929 and more than 99 
percent of the vastly greater amount extended in 
1938. Of the total bill for the decade, public 
funds contributed all but 3.4 percent. 

No less significant than the shift from private 
to public funds has been the shift in financial re¬ 
sponsibility for public relief among local. State, 
and Federal Governments. Although the urban 
data do not afford an exact measure of this trans¬ 
fer, some conception thereof is conveyed by a 
comparison of the financial structure of public 
aid in the 116 urban areas at the beginning and 
at the end of the decade. The Federal Govern¬ 
ment provided no funds for public aid in 1929; 
it provided more than 60 percent of the public 
outlays in 1938 in the form of WPA earnings and 
another 5 or 6 percent in the form of matching 
grants for old-age assistance, aid to dependent 
children, and aid to the blind. The relative shares 
of State and local funds are not easily approxi¬ 
mated because the division of responsibility for 

“ Wynne, Waller, Jr., Five Years of Rural Relief, Works Progress Admin¬ 
istration, 1938, pp. 25-28. 


various types of aid differs widely from one State 
to another. State support for general relief has 
been almost entirely a development of the decade 
under review, and State participation in the financ¬ 
ing of special types of public assistance has been 
rapidly extended under the requirements of the 
Social Security Act.^® Paralleling the transfer of 
fiscal responsibility from smaller to larger govern¬ 
mental units has been the shift of administrative 
and supervisory responsibility to State and Fed¬ 
eral levels.^^ 

Trend toward work .—^The trend away from direct 
subsistence benefits and toward work projects can 
be viewed from two distinct angles: first, as a 
move to require work in return for aid; second, as 
a move to provide earnings instead of relief to 
needy employable persons. Work relief pay¬ 
ments under the general relief program must be 
regarded as a step from direct to work assistance, 
but they were extended in accordance with 
budgetary needs and hence can hardly be regarded 
as a step from relief toward earnings. 

The progressive emphasis on work program 
earnings has already been noted and is graphi¬ 
cally shown in chart 3. The extent of the shift 
over the 10-year period from direct assistance to 
work can be measured only for aid extended from 
public funds, since private relief outlays in the 
116 urban areas are not separated into direct and 
work relief payments. It is known that an 
appreciable volume of private aid was dispensed 
in the form of work relief during the early years of 
the depression, but private work projects were 
sponsored primarily by emergency committees 
and were relatively short-lived. With the de¬ 
velopment of Federal work projects, private work 
relief has virtually disappeared. 

The alternating rise and fall of the direct assist¬ 
ance curve and the combined curve of work relief 
and work program earnings is shown in chart 8. 
Public aid extended in return for work was only 
0.1 percent of total outlays in 1929. The pro¬ 
portion of such aid rose rapidly thereafter, as 
public work projects were formed to give emer¬ 
gency relief and employment to the many able- 
bodied workers applying for aid. Even before 

23 For information on sources of funds for these types of^id, see “Sources of 
Funds Expended for the Special Types of Public Assistance and General 
Relief, 1938-39,” Social Security Bulletin, Vol. 3, No. 1 (January 1940), pp. 
65-72. 

2* See pp. 28-30. 

2‘ See p. 19. 


24 




the first Federal work projects were begun under 
the FERA, work relief had risen to more than 
one-fourth of the monthly outlays for public aid. 

The attempt under the CWA to provide the 
unemployed with regular jobs at normal wages 
and hours meant that a much larger share of total 
outlays went to persons employed on work proj¬ 
ects. At the height of this program, earnings plus 
work relief outlays accounted for three-fourths of 
all public aid extended in the 116 urban areas. 
This proportion declined sharply when the CWA 
projects were abandoned in favor of an expanded 
work relief program under the FERA, but pay¬ 
ments in return for work formed more than one- 
third of public outlays for aid throughout 1934 and 
during most of 1935. Replacement of FERA 
work relief projects by a new work program 
offering security wages to the unemployed again 


boosted the proportion of outlays in return for 
work. During 1936 more than two-thirds of the 
total public outlays for aid in the 116 areas were 
for WPA earnings and work relief. 

The expansion in payments for the special types 
of public assistance during 1937 and 1938 contrib¬ 
uted slightly to a reduction in the proportion 
of public aid paid to recipients in return for work, 
but this reduction did not signify a reversal in the 
trend toward work as a means of extending aid to 
needy employable persons. Special assistance 
payments are intended solely for imemployable 
groups, and their inclusion in the data obscures 
the full extent of the shift away from direct assist¬ 
ance as a method of caring for the needy unem¬ 
ployed. 

The percentage distribution of the 10-year out¬ 
lays for public and private aid in these 116 urban 


Chart 8 .—Public expenditures for direct assistance and for work program earnings and work relief, 116 urban 

areas, January 1929—December 1938 * 


MILLIONS OF DOLLARS 


MILLIONS OF DOLLARS 
100 



90 


80 


70 


60 


50 


40 


30 


20 


10 


J Based on table C-1. 

tKepresents public general direct relief and special types of public assistance. 
TtRepresents OWA, WPA, and public general work relief. 


25 







































































areas (chart 4) shows earnings on work programs 
and work relief to have constituted slightly more 
than half of the $6,853-million total. Work pro¬ 
gram earnings alone made up almost 42 percent 
of the total. 

Expansion in Per Capita Burdens 

Changes in the relief burden over the 10-year 
period can perhaps be comprehended better if the 
aggregate outlays for these 116 urban areas are 
expressed in terms of the amounts spent per in¬ 
habitant. The per capita expenditures mentioned 
in the following discussion relate to intercensus 
years and therefore are based on population figures 
estimated from the censuses of 1920, 1930, and 
1940. 

During 1929 the per inhabitant cost of public 
and private aid in the 116 urban areas combined 
was $1.06. In 1938, the last year of the decade, 
it was 28 times as much, or $29.69. If the value 
of certain other types of aid omitted from the 
urban series could be added to the 1938 data, the 
rise in the per capita cost would be somewhat 
greater. 

These per capita figures, of course, give no clue 
to the actual distribution of the burden of provid¬ 
ing aid within these areas. Relief funds come from 
Federal and State as well as local sources, and resi¬ 
dents of these urban areas may have borne either 
more or less of a per capita burden for the relief of 
destitution and need. 

Per capita costs for the individual areas varied 
widely,^® but for the combined areas they were 
consistently higher than for the total United 
States. The differential may be explained, at 
least in part, by a higher incidence of unemploy¬ 
ment and need in large urban communities. 
Other contributing factors are higher costs and 
levels of living, more liberal relief standards, and 
better organization for relief operations in large 
urban areas. Limiting the comparison, of neces¬ 
sity, to the types of aid and span of years covered 
by chart 2, we find for 1933 a per capita annual 
outlay in the total United States of $8.33, as 
compared with $10.86 in the 116 urban areas.^^ 
Corresponding figures for 1938 W’ere $20.86 and 

“ See pp. 33-37. 

w In this connection it should be pointed out that various agricultural 
subsidies not considered relief are available to residents of rural areas and 
that certain relief programs omitted from the data extend aid only in rural 
areas. 


$29.46. Not only are the amounts per inhabitant 
larger for the urban areas, both at the beginning 
and end of the 6-year period, but the advance was 
relatively more than for the total United States. 

For a fair appraisal of the growing relief burden 
it w^ould be desirable to view relief costs over the 
decade in relation to the incomes available for 
paying them. It is neither feasible nor logical 
to attempt this direct^ for residents of the 116 
urban areas,^® but some conception of the Nation's 
ability to support the larger national relief burden 
can be gained from the Department of Commerce 
series on estimated national mcome payments, 
which includes payments for relief and work 
program earnings.^ The data on total income 
payments in the United States during the 10-year 
period under review are plotted in chart 1. 

Relief and work program earnings have, of 
course, formed a larger share of national income 
payments during recent years than at the begin¬ 
ning of the decade, but at no time have they ex¬ 
ceeded 5 percent of the annual total. On a per 
inhabitant basis, the relief payment in 1929 was 
$0.59 as compared with an income payment of 
$672. In 1933, at the depth of the depression, the 
relief payment was $9.56 and the total income 
payment $372. By the close of the decade relief 
payments per inhabitant had risen sharply to 
$24.28, but national income had also risen, to 
$510, so that the relief payment formed only a 
slightly larger share of the total income payment 
for 1938. Even in that year of peak expenditures 
for public and private aid, it averaged less than 5 
percent of estimated monthly income payments. 

s* Since local relief costs are not borne directly by local residents, such a 
comparison would have little meaning. 

w Estimates of U. 8. Department of Commerce, Survey of Current Business, 
Vol. 19, No. 10 (October 1939), pp. 15-16, table 41. Per capita payments have 
been calculated from these data on the basis of population figures for the 
continental United States estimated from the U. 8. censuses of 1920,1930, and 
1940. In the national series on income payments, relief payments include, in 
addition to payments for which data are available for the 116 urban areas, the 
following: subsistence payments to farmers by the FERA, Resettlement 
Administration, and Farm Security Administration; earnings of enrolled 
persons in the CCC; nonrelief earnings on administrative and work relief 
projects of the FERA; earnings under the emergency education and student 
aid programs of the FERA and under the out-of-school and student work 
programs of the National Youth Administration; earnings on work projects 
operated under the Federal works program by Federal agencies other than 
the WPA, CCC, and NYA; and earnings on Federal agency projects financed 
by transfer of WPA funds. Payments for private relief are not included in 
the series on income payments. 

It should be noted that direct relief, work relief, and work program earnings 
are all included as components of national income payments because they 
swell the purchasing power in the hands of consumers; since direct relief is 
regarded as a transfer item of income, it is excluded from the Department 
of Commerce annual estimates of national income produced. 


26 









. IV . 

( 

Diversity in Local Trends and Patterns of Aid 


The discussion has so far been focused on the 
combined movement of relief costs in the 116 
urban areas. From the analysis of the combined 
expenditure data there has emerged a composite 
pattern of public and private aid in urban areas 
over the decade. Merged in this over-all pattern 
are very diverse patterns for the 116 local areas. 
These communities have experienced common 
problems of depression and mounting relief costs 
since 1929, but they have experienced them in 
varying degrees of intensity. They have utilized 
substantially the same programs and types of aid 
in relieving distress and need, but they have 
combined them in different proportions. In the 
actual distribution of aid to needy families and 
individuals they have functioned as 116 distinct 
units, operating under a wide variety of legisla¬ 
tive, financial, and administrative provisions. 
Lack of uniformity is such a dominant character¬ 
istic of the urban relief experience that some com¬ 
parative analysis of local expenditure patterns is 
essential for an accurate portrayal of recent trends 
in public and private aid. For a fair evaluation 
of developments during the decade, the dissimi¬ 
larities are quite as significant as the similarities. 

Regardless of the fact that State and Federal 
Governments have assumed more administrative 
and supervisory powers along with more fiscal 
responsibility for public aid, the city or county is 
still the operating unit in the distribution of most 
types of aid. Needy families and individuals 
must seek help within their home community; 
the kind and amount of help they receive will 
depend on conditions in the particular locality 
in which they happen to live, e. g., the combina¬ 
tion of programs and types of aid provided, the 
financial resources available, and the procedures 
and standards maintained by the local agencies. 

The basic data for comparing relief patterns 
and trends in the separate urban areas are pre¬ 
sented in appendix C. The data on aggregate 
annual outlays for the various types of aid appear¬ 
ing m tables C-2—C-11 show the changes in 
absolute expenditures that have occurred during 
the decade, but they do not reflect clearly the 


relief patterns of the individual areas. Nor do 
they lend themselves to comparisons of relief 
burdens and relief trends, because the areas differ 
so greatly not only in total population but also in 
the rate of population change over the decade. 
Interarea differences in the composition of the 
relief structure and in the relative emphasis 
placed on various programs and types of aid can 
best be measured by the percentage distributions 
of the annual expenditures within each area, 
shown in tables C-12—C-21. These percentage 
data parallel those given for the combined areas 
in table 2. The most satisfactory basis for quan¬ 
titative comparisons of relief burdens and relief 
trends appears to be the amounts spent per inhabit¬ 
ant within the separate areas. The per inhabit¬ 
ant data in tables C-22—C-31 can be used to 
compare outlays under different programs as well 
as in different localities.^ 

Graphic evidence of the diversity in urban 
relief patterns is afforded by the series of diagrams 
for individual areas presented in appendix B. 
Since the series is designed to bring out differences 
in the trends and composition of expenditures over 
the 10-year period rather than differences in aggre¬ 
gate outlays, the 116 diagrams have been standard¬ 
ized for mass; that is, the vertical scales have been 
chosen in such a way that the shaded area under 
the total expenditure curve will be the same in 
every diagram. This objective was accomplished 
by using a standard height on the vertical scale 
to represent the 10-year average monthly expendi¬ 
ture for each urban area. The appropriate dollar 
scale has been placed on each diagram and the 
position of the 10-year monthly average marked 
by an arrow. Thus the monthly expenditure 
trends for each urban area are recorded in absolute 
values, but interarea differences in magnitude are 
subordinated in order to facilitate comparisons 
of the urban patterns with respect to such factors 
as the timing and composition of expenditures. 

Even a cursory examination of the patterns dis¬ 
closes wide divergence in trends and conspicuous 

> For some discussion of the limitations of the per inhabitant data, see 
pp. 34 and 36. 


452436 ”— 42 - 


3 


27 





variation in the emphasis placed on component 
programs and types of aid at any given time and 
over the whole decade. It should be recognized, 
however, that the diagrams offer no information 
on the comparative relief burdens per inhabitant 
or the comparative adequacy of payments to 
needy residents. 

Factors Contributing to Diversity 

Before examining the statistical evidence of 
dissimilarity in the 116 urban patterns, some 
attention should be given to the underlying factors 
that have contributed to local diversity in the 
composition and trend of expenditures over the 
10-year period. Those factors are multiple and 
complex. Among them—but hardly the most 
influential—are basic differences in the incidence 
of need in the individual communities, and in 
the prevalence of particular types of dependency. 
It is extremely difficult to measure these basic 
differences, but they indubitably exist and help 
to shape the course of expenditures in individual 
areas. Interarea differences in the costs and 
levels of living also exist but are of minor import 
compared with less tangible factors such as the 
prevailing social and political attitudes toward 
the treatment of dependency. Accepted local 
procedures and standards of assistance are major 
determinants of relief trends. 

The most obvious source of diversity in local 
relief patterns, hqwever, is the availability of 
funds for financing public and private aid. It 
means far more than differences in the per capita 
wealth and income of the political units concerned. 
It means also the varying extent to which local 
and State governments are able and willing to 
tap their financial resources for relief purposes, 
and—equally variable and uncertain—the fiscal 
relationships prevailing among the local, State, 
and Federal Governments. 

The major shifts in the incidence of relief costs 
from local to State and Federal Governments 
during the decade 1929-38 gave rise, of course, 
to the extremely difficult problem of distributing 
State and Federal funds among local areas in 
proportion to their relief needs and their abilities 
to meet these needs. With the States themselves 
varying markedly in relief needs and financial 
resources and in the absence of central control of 
their relief policies, it was to be expected that the 
States would differ greatly in the extent to which 


they sought and achieved a solution to this 
problem. But even in the realm of Federal 
financing the policies adopted have not always 
contributed effectively to its solution. 

RFC advances were negotiated on a loan basis, 
and the bulk of such advances were subsequently 
canceled. Under the FERA program a combined 
system of matching and variable grants was used, 
with the avowed intent of supporting minimum 
standards in all areas but with no established 
criteria for ascertaining how much Federal help 
was essential to enable the States and local areas 
to achieve this end.^ 

Under the Social Security Act matching grants 
for each of the special types of public assistance 
have been on a uniform basis for aU States having 
approved plans, with the result that poorer States 
have been handicapped in maintaining adequate 
levels of payments. Federal participation in the 
financing of each of the special types of assistance 
is limited not only by predetermined Federal 
matching ratios but also by eligibility restrictions 
and maximum payments to individual recipients 
prescribed by the States.^ No minimum levels 
of payments are prescribed under the act, and the 
disparity among States in the amounts paid to 
recipients is striking. 

Even under the federally operated work pro¬ 
grams it has been very difficult to ensure the allo¬ 
cation of Federal outlays among local areas in 
proportion to their needs for emergency public 
employment. Mandatory requirements laid down 
in successive appropriation acts concerning spon¬ 
sors’ contributions to WPA-project costs have 
undoubtedly influenced the geographic distribu¬ 
tion of WPA employment. Beyond these factors 
there remains a wide area of administrative discre¬ 
tion at the local and State, as well as the Federal, 
level. Moreover, local and State initiative in 
formulating and sponsoring suitable projects and 
policies of providing or withholding alternative 
forms of aid for able-bodied workers not assigned 
to WPA projects are all subject to a high degree 
of variance. 

Efforts of the Federal agency to relate quotas 
to need within legislative restrictions are com¬ 
plicated by such differences in local and State 

* For discussion of allocation of Federal funds under the FERA, see 
Williams, Edward A., Federal Aid for Relief, 1939, pp. 180 fl. 

* See “Sources of Funds Expended for the Special Types of Public Assist 
ance and General Relief in 1938-1939,” Social Security Bulletin, Vol. 3, No. 1 
(January 1940), pp. 65-72. 


28 



practice, as well as by the ordinary difficulties of 
approving, developing, and maintaining work 
projects that will provide the desired level of em¬ 
ployment and wage payments in each area. 

The Federal work programs have minimized 
geographic differences in the level of payments to 
recipients assigned to work projects, but they have 
only partially succeeded in achieving equal op¬ 
portunity for assignments in the different local¬ 
ities. In addition, the security wage scale of the 
WPA program has introduced a further differen¬ 
tiation in the level of payments provided for needy 
families and individuals within each area, accentu¬ 
ating the inequity of treatment of those eligible 
for but not receiving the more liberal form of aid. 

The marked disparity in the levels of care pro¬ 
vided under the several programs and the differ¬ 
entiation among needy groups that is furthered 
by the varied eligibility requirements of Federal 
and Federal-State programs afford many occasions 
for alternative choices in the disposition of local 
and State funds and thus contribute to the dis¬ 
similarity in urban relief patterns. A choice may 
have to be made, for example, between using local 
funds to sponsor a work project for needy em¬ 
ployable workers or to provide more adequate 
care for destitute unemployable persons under the 
general relief program. 

During the decade under review, the difficulties 
confronting local communities in planning their 
fiscal requirements for the treatment of depend¬ 
ency were multiplied not only by the great ex¬ 
pansion in relief needs but also by the large-scale 
Federal and State participation which this ex¬ 
pansion necessitated. The impact of Federal 
and State participation has so modified the re¬ 
lief structure that, to a considerable extent, the 
burden which rests upon the community is re¬ 
sidual and is determined by the provisions of 
Federal and Federal-State programs. 

At the beginning of the decade, local communi¬ 
ties were largely autonomous both in the financ¬ 
ing and administration of relief. Faced with a 
relatively small and stable relief problem, they 
were able to plan and control, to a much larger 
extent than in later years, the amounts, types, 
and relative proportions of aid to be extended 
under different programs. Although in some 
areas there was State participation in, and ad¬ 
ministrative supervision of, certain types of 
relief—notably aid for veterans and for special 


groups of needy unemployable persons—the 
specific legislative basis of such aid generally 
offered some assurance of continuity and a guide 
for future planning within the local community. 
With the. development of emergency relief opera¬ 
tions, financed in part by State and Federal ap¬ 
propriations, integrated planning at the local 
level became utterly impracticable. The States 
likewise were confronted with an unknown vari¬ 
able in the form of Federal grants for unemploy¬ 
ment relief under the FERA and, for a brief inter¬ 
lude, Federal wage payments under the broad- 
scale eWA program. 

The attempted redefinition of the fiscal respon¬ 
sibility to be assumed by the Federal Government 
after the close of 1935 has not eliminated the un¬ 
certainties of Federal participation. With each 
session of Congress and with each new WPA ap¬ 
propriation the question is reopened, and modi¬ 
fications may be made in the eligibility require¬ 
ments, conditions of employment, sponsors’ con¬ 
tributions, and types of projects permissible under 
the law. Local quotas of WPA employment and 
outlays are generally expanded or contracted in 
accordance with current Federal appropriations. 

The bases of Federal financial contributions to 
State public assistance programs are more explicit, 
but the Social Security Act has altered significantly 
the scope of State and local control over these 
types of aid. Although some funds are still con¬ 
tributed by local communities, approved programs 
are operated under State supervision or direction 
in accordance with Federal requirements concern¬ 
ing eligibility and standards of administration. 
Adoption of proposed changes in these require¬ 
ments or in the authorized grant-in-aid pro¬ 
cedure to allow for variable Federal gi-ants would 
have significant repercussions on State and local 
programs. i 

It is apparent that through Federal work pro¬ 
grams and the public assistance programs the 
Federal and State Governments now exercise a 
dominant influence on the relief structures of aU 
local communities and bear a major share of the 
combined financial burden. No statistical data 
are available to show the relative reliance of the 
116 urban areas on Federal, State, and local funds, 
but the prevailing trend is clearly toward a dimin¬ 
ishing share of local participation in financial, as 
in administrative and supervisory, control. 

It should also be apparent from the diversity 

29 



in local patterns of aid that Federal participation 
has complicated, as well as strengthened, the relief 
structure, and that the basis for effective coordina¬ 
tion among the three levels of public responsibility 
has not yet been laid. New national. State, and 
local agencies have been superimposed on tradi¬ 
tional State and local set-ups, with resultant com¬ 
plexity in the relief mechanism of each community 
and a continuing lack of uniformity among com¬ 
munities that does not stem from differences in 
local needs or in resources for meeting those needs. 
The difficulties inlierent in coordinating the objec¬ 
tives and operations of a variety of relief programs 
administered by a variety of agencies on the 
national. State, and local levels have been alle¬ 
viated to some degree by the progressive tendency 
toward the establishment of unified welfare depart¬ 
ments in both State and local governments. There 
remains, however, a complexity in relief adminis¬ 
tration that contributes to inequities and to 
illogical variations in local trends and patterns of 
expenditures. 

Comparative Trends in Total Outlays 

The most vivid impression conveyed by the 
series of diagrams in appendix B is the dis¬ 
similarity in the trends in total outlays over 
the 10-year period. The contours of the com¬ 
posite expenditure patterns present startling con¬ 
trasts in the sharpness of the rise from 1929 levels 
and in the frequency, abruptness, amplitude, and 
timing of fluctuations. No slow-motion statistical 
comparisons can enhance the impression of variety 
in urban relief trends, but they can underline 
salient points of difference and indicate the range 
of variation recorded by the diagrams and by the 
tabular data in appendix C. 

All the 116 urban trends turn upward, of course, 
from 1929 levels, but they reach their peaks for 
the decade at three widely separated periods. 
Fifty-four areas, including many of the larger 
cities and only three of the southern cities,'* * show 
the maximum monthly outlays in 1938, the same 
year that the combined urban outlays reached 
their peak for the decade. Almost as many areas, 
52 in all, register a lO-year peak in outlays at least 
4 years earlier, during the height of the CWA. 
This group includes most of the southern areas. In 
general the trends for these 52 areas show second¬ 
ary peaks in outlays during 1938, but there are 

* Asheville, N. C.; Louisville, Ky.; and New Orleans, La. 


conspicuous exceptions to this rule. In Balti¬ 
more, Md., for example, the monthly expenditure 
peak is lower m 1938 than in several preceding 
years.® In 10 urban areas, among them New 
York City, a maximum volume of aid was extended 
near the end of 1935 or the beginning of 1936.® 

No attempt has been made to compare the 
urban trends with respect to the relative increase 
from 1929 to monthly peaks, since of themselves 
these high points tell little concerning the sus¬ 
tained rise in expenditures over the 10-year period. 
Such a comparison would be particularly inappro¬ 
priate for the CWA for which peaks represented 
concentrated outlays of Federal funds over a brief 
period. A more useful index of the varying 
growth of relief burdens is the percentage change 
in annual outlays from 1929 to 1938. 

Increases in annual expenditures over the 10- 
year period ranged all the way from 776 percent in 
Cambridge, Mass., to 19,423 percent in Mobile, 
Ala. Both these extremes are in sharp contrast 
with the thirtyfold increase in the combined ex¬ 
penditures for the 116 areas. In 24 localities the 
expansion in annual outlays was less than twenty¬ 
fold, while in 27 localities it was more than fifty¬ 
fold. In interpreting comparative rates of in¬ 
crease over the decade it is essential to remember 
the disparity in 1929 base figures. A marked per¬ 
centage increase may mean relatively meager out¬ 
lays and light burdens m 1929 rather than generous 
outlays and heavy burdens in 1938. 

The expansion in outlays proceeded very un¬ 
evenly in the different localities. A few com¬ 
munities experienced their most pronounced rise 
in expenditures during the early stages of the 
depression, prior to Federal participation.^ Others 
made their major advances much later, with the 
help of Federal funds. In 15 of the areas the 
percentage rise in annual outlays from 1929 to 
1932 was equal to one-third or more of the relative 
increase for the entire decade; in 39 areas it was 
less than one-tenth of the total rise for the decade. 
Percentage increases in annual outlays during 
these 4 years ranged widely, from 60 percent in 
Allentown, Pa., to 1,801 percent in New Rochelle, 

» other outstanding exceptions are Niagara Falls, N. Y., and Norfolk and 
Roanoke, Va. 

• In addition to New York City, this group comprises the following nine 
areas; Allentown, Chester, and Erie, Pa.; Buffalo and Rochester, New York; 
Los Angeles and San Diego, Calif.; St. Paul, Minn.; and Springfield, Mass. 

’ In Niagara Falls, N. Y., the percentage increase from 1929 to 1932 was 
more than 82 percent of the increase for the decade; in Allentown, Pa., and 
Charleston, S. C., it was less than 1 percent. 


30 






N. Y. Over this same 4-year period the combined 
expenditures for the 116 areas rose 576 percent 
above 1929 levels. For more than half of the 116 
localities the rise in annual outlays prior to Federal 
participation was between 250 and 750 percent. 

Further evidence of variation in the timing of 
outlays is found in the degree of concentration of 
expenditm-es during the last 3 years of the decade. 
It may be recalled that 55 percent of the com¬ 
bined urban relief bill for the decade was incurred 
during 1936, 1937, and 1938. Among the indi¬ 
vidual areas this proportion ranged from less than 
one-third to more than two-thirds of the aggregate 
outlays for the 10-year period.® 

Comparative Emphasis on Different Programs 
and Types of Aid 

Most of the expenditure patterns for individual 
urban areas include at least some outlays for 
every program and type of aid covered by the 
urban data,® but they differ tremendously in the 
emphasis accorded various components of the re¬ 
lief structure. Even within each locality the em¬ 
phasis changes from year to year. The wide vari¬ 
ation in the division of outlays among the specific 
types of aid is revealed in some measure by the 
urban area diagrams (appendix B) and in detail 
by the percentage distributions of annual expend¬ 
itures (tables C-12—C-21). The range of vari¬ 
ation among the urban areas is indicated in table 

« The smallest proportion, 33 percent, was spent in Shreveport, La.; the 
largest proportion, 71 percent, in Terre Haute, Ind. 

• For number of areas reporting some expenditures for specified types of 
aid in various years, see table 7, p. 37. 


3, which records for each year the highest and 
lowest percentages of total outlays expended for 
each type of aid. These various measures permit 
a comparison of distributions of expenditures 
among specific types of aid in the separate urban 
areas and reveal the wide divergence of such dis¬ 
tributions from those for all areas (table 2). 

The 116 areas differed materially even in their 
degree of reliance on public funds. The proportion 
of private relief was relatively low, of course, in 
every area, but it ranged from 0.2 percent of the 
10-year aggregate in Malden, Mass., and Pontiac, 
Mich., to 14.2 percent in Wilmington, Del. 
Twenty-one of the urban areas relied on public 
funds for at least 99 percent of total outlaj/s. For 
the combined areas the proportion of public funds 
was 96.6 percent. 

At the beginning of the decade, private contri¬ 
butions reported for the various areas ranged from 
0.7 percent of annual outlays in Fall River, Mass., 
to 100 percent of those in Birmingham and Mobile, 
Ala. The percentage for the combined areas in 
1929 was 24.2 percent. _ 

Demands of the depression caused rapid read¬ 
justments in the proportions of public and private 
aid in most areas. By 1931 both Birmingham and 
Mobile were extending some aid from public funds. 
Private relief gained temporarily in relative im¬ 
portance and in some areas completely dominated 
the relief picture during the first years of the 
depression. This dominance is notably true of 
Wilmington, Del., and Kansas City, Mo. Emer¬ 
gency relief drives resulted in sharp peaks in 


Table S.—Range among 116 urban areas in percent of total public and private aid expended for specified types of 

aid, 1929-38 '■ 


Year 

Public funds 

Private funds 

General relief 

CWA and WPA 
earnings 

Special types of public assistance 

Total 

Direct relief 

Work relief 

Old-age 

assistance 

Aid to depend¬ 
ent children 

Aid to the 
blind 

Lowest 

Highest 

Lowest 

Highest 

Lowest 

Highest 

Lowest 

Highest 

Lowest 

Highest 

Lowest 

Highest 

Lowest 

Highest 

Lowest 

Highest 

1929-38. 

21.0 

61.8 

8.3 

57.9 

1.3 

26.9 

25.2 

69.0 

(0 

22.8 

0.0 

10.5 

0.0 

4.1 

0.2 

14.2 

1929 

0 

93.5 

0 

93.5 

0 

2.1 



0.0 

3.1 

0 

69.9 

0 

40.6 

.7 

100.0 

1930 . 

0 

93.7 

0 

93.6 

0 

50.2 



0 

31.4 

0 

65.1 

0 

39.1 

.4 

100.0 

1Q31 

0 

95.4 

0 

95.1 

0 

73.0 



0 

38.5 

0 

53.2 

0 

34.1 

.6 

85.0 

1932 

7.2 

96.7 

0 

96.6 

0 

71.9 



0 

38.6 

0 

56.0 

0 

15.7 

.4 

92.8 

1933. 

30.4 

91.5 

1.6 

90.7 

0 

64.6 

1.1 

51.2 

0 

23.0 

0 

14.0 

0 

9.4 


27.5 

1934__- 

34.2 

83.0 

8.2 

72.8 

.6 

54.5 

10.7 

62.2 

0 

11.3 

0 

8.9 

0 

2.9 

0 

10.2 

1935_ 

55.8 

92.8 

5.3 

83.4 

0 

76.8 

2.0 

34.7 

0 

14.5 

0 

9.6 

0 

2.8 

0 

7.8 

1936—_ 

.7 

50.3 

.7 

49.0 

0 

7.2 

43.7 

95.7 

0 

20.8 

0 

9.8 

0 

1.9 

0 

7.3 

1937_ 

0 

57.4 

0 

57.3 

0 

8.9 

13.7 

92.3 

0 

40.8 

0 

26.1 

0 

2.4 

0 

9.3 

1938__ 

0 

60.5 

(?) 

0 

(») 

(5) 

23.3 

92.1 

.2 

39.6 

0 

24.6 

0 

2.6 

0 

6.2 


1 Based on tables C-12—C-21. > l/css than 0.1 percent. » Figures not avaUable. 


31 




















































private relief outlays in many of the New England, 
Middle Atlantic, and North Central areasd® The 
prominence of private relief in the expenditure 
patterns of southern cities is also worthy of note. 
In many commimities in the South, where there 
have been less substantial outlays for public gen¬ 
eral relief from State and local funds, private relief 
has continued to form a sizable share of the relief 
burden throughout the decade. 

Private relief has disappeared entirely from the 
relief structures of very few of the 116 urban areas, 
but it has been much reduced in importance in 
'every area. During 1938 the maximum per¬ 
centage of private relief, 5.2 percent of annual 
outlays, was dispensed in Hartford, Conn. The 
percentage for all areas was only 0.8 percent in 
1938. 

Although general relief was the dominant type 
of aid in the combined urban expenditure pattern 
for the decade, it accounted for the largest share 
of outlays in less than half of the individual com¬ 
munities. In 58 of the areas it was exceeded in 
importance by WPA earnings and in one area by 
special assistance payments. General relief was 
relatively most important in Buffalo, N. Y., where 
it represented more than three-fifths of the aggre¬ 
gate expenditures for public and private aid, and 
least important in TeiTe Haute, Ind., where it 
represented only one-fifth of total outlays. In 
21 areas less than one-third of the 10-year outlays 
was dispensed in the form of general relief. 

Despite the basic role of this type of aid in the 
public relief structure, it was granted in every 
area during only 5 of the 10 years under review. 
These 5 years, 1932 through 1936, embrace the 
period of Federal participation in the financing of 
general relief. At the beginning of the decade, 
public general relief was missing from the relief 
structures of nine areas.'® With the exception of 
Kansas City, Mo., these areas were all in the South. 
San Antonio, Tex., reported no outlays for general 
relief during either 1937 or 1938. 

The Federal work programs have operated in 
every urban area over substantially the same spans 
of time, but they have formed widely dissimilar 

See, for example, Chicago, Ill.; Hartford, Conn.; New York, N. Y.; and 
Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, Pa. 

>> See, for example, Charlotte and Winston-Salem, N. C.; Louisville, Ky.; 
Memphis, Tenn.; and Richmond, Va. 

» See table 7, p. 37. 

>* Asheville, N. C.; Birmingham and Mobile, -41a.: Kansas City, Mo.; 
Knoxville and Memphis, Tenn.; Louisville, Ky.; New Orleans, La.; and 
Wilmington, Del. 


shares of aggregate outlays in the 116 urban areas. 
Wages extended under the CWA ranged in relative 
importance from only 1.3 percent of the decade’s 
expenditures in Philadelphia, Pa., to almost one- 
fourth of those in Shreveport, La.^^ For the com¬ 
bined areas the proportion was 4.4 percent. 

WPA wage payments, which accounted for 37 
percent of the 10-year outlays in the combined 
urban areas, formed less than one-fourth of the 
aggregate in 6 areas and more than one-half in 
16 areas. Such payments accounted for only 13 
percent of the total aid extended in New Rochelle, 
N. Y., over this 10-year period, as contrasted with 
63 percent in Terre Haute, Ind. It should be 
noted again that the limitation of the data on 
WPA earnings to projects operated within the 
area affects the data for the several areas in vary¬ 
ing degrees. In some cities many residents may 
have been employed on projects operated outside 
the limits of the reporting area; in others the 
reverse may have been true. 

The special types of public assistance account 
for widely varying proportions of the 10-year 
outlays, partly because of the delayed enactment 
of enabling legislation in many States and partly 
because of differences in the coverage of programs 
and in standards of assistance payments. At the 
beginning of the decade, 11 urban areas in the 
southern region had none of the three forms of 
special assistance. Twelve areas distributed no 
statutory aid to dependent children, 56 areas no 
aid to the blind, and 114 areas no old-age assist¬ 
ance. By 1938 all 116 areas extended assistance 
to the aged under State plans approved by the 
Social Security Board. All but 4 areas extended 
aid to dependent children, although 10 of the areas 
administering this type of aid were in States not 
yet participating in Federal grants under the Social 
Security Act.^® Only 8 areas extended no aid to 
the needy blind in 1938 4 of the areas granting 

this type of assistance were in States in which the 
program was operated without Federal partici¬ 
pation.'® 

X The calculated percentage figure for New Rochelle, N. Y., is slightly 
higher than that for Shreveport, but it is probably inflated to a large extent 
because the CWA expenditure data relate to the county exclusive of the city 
of Yonkers instead of the city of New Rochelle. 

■» El Paso, Fort Worth, Houston, and San Antonio, Tex. 

>« Bridgeport, Hartford, New Britain, and New Haven, Conn.; Chicago 
and Springfield, HI.; Dallas, Tex.; Des Moines and Sioux City, Iowa; and 
Louisvilie, Ky. 

” Dallas, El Paso, Fort W'orth, Houston, and San Antonio, Tex.; Louis¬ 
ville, Ky.; Providence, R. I.; and Wilmington, Del. 

19 Chicago and Springfield, Ill.; and Kansas City and St. Louis, Mo, 


32 








The share of 10-year outlays devoted to special 
assistance payments ranged from 0.3 percent in 
Norfolk and in Roanoke, Va., to 33 percent in 
Sacramento, Calif. In 10 areas less than 5 percent 
of all aid was extended through the three types of 
special assistance, as compared with the 10-percent 
share spent in the combined areas for these types 
of aid. 

Old-age assistance ranged in relative importance 
from less than 0.02 percent of the 10-year outlays 
in Norfolk, Va,, to almost 23 percent of those in 
Denver, Colo,; aid to dependent children from 
zero in three Texas areas to 10.5 percent in Sagi¬ 
naw, Mich.; and aid to the blind from zero in 
seven areas ^ to 4.1 percent in Springfield, Ill. 
These interarea differences in emphasis are not 
entirely attributable to differences in coverage or 
span of operation. A comparison of relative out¬ 
lays for old-age assistance in 1938, when all 116 
areas extended such aid, shows proportions rang¬ 
ing from 0.2 to 39,6 percent of annual outlays. 
Combined payments for old-age assistance in 
these areas in 1938 constituted 9,9 percent of the 
aggregate outlays for all types of aid. 

Interarea comparisons of the trend away from 
relief and toward work program earnings also 
reveal marked differences, with the southern areas 
showing distinctly high ratios of earnings to 
total outlays and New England areas distinctly 
low ratios. This situation reflects the relatively 
greater dependence of the southern localities on 
Federal programs and hence cannot be interpreted 
as evidence of a fundamental difference in policy 
or attitude toward work projects as a means of 
extending aid to the able-bodied unemployed. 
The comparative shares of aid extended as work 
program earnings varied among the 116 urban 
areas from 25 percent to 69 percent of the 10-year 
outlays. The minimum percentage applies to 
Worcester, Mass., and the maximum to Terre 
Haute, Ind. 

With work relief wages added to work program 
earnings, the range of interarea variation is even 
greater. In Charleston, S, C., 87 percent of all 
aid extended during the decade was in the form of 
work relief or work program wages. In Phila¬ 
delphia, Pa., only 28 percent of the total volume 
of aid was extended to recipients in return for work. 


1* El Paso, Fort Worth, and San Antonio. 

Dallas, El Paso, Fort Worth, Houston, and San Antonio, Tex.; Provi¬ 
dence, R. I.; and Wilmington, Del. 


Wage payments, of course, assumed greater 
prominence in annual outlays during the latter 
years of the decade than in the 10-year aggregate 
expenditures. In 1938 WPA earnings alone com¬ 
posed 63 percent of coihbined outlays in these 116 
areas.^^ They represented 92 percent of the 
annual expenditure in Norfolk, Va., and, at the 
other extreme, only 23 percent in New Rochelle, 
N. Y. 

Comparative Relief Burdens 

As suggested earlier, the comparative rise in 
costs over 1929 levels gives no clue to the com¬ 
parative relief burdens for the 116 urban areas. 
One must turn to per capita data for a common 
denominator of relief costs over the 10-year period. 
Comparative annual rates per inhabitant for all 
public and private aid and for each component 
type of aid are given in tables C-22—C-31. 
With the exception of those for 1930, the per in¬ 
habitant rates are based on estimated population 
data. The 1929 population figures for the sep¬ 
arate areas were estimated from the censuses of 
1920 and 1930; population data for 1931-38 were 
estimated on the basis of the censuses of 1930 and 
1940. 

By considering first the relief bills for the entire 
decade, we can eliminate differences in timing of 
outlays and obtain an over-all comparison of 
relief burdens in the 116 urban areas. The lowest 
per inhabitant cost for the decade was $21; the 
highest, $253. These extreme rates applied to 
Shreveport, La., and Boston, Mass. Between 
these extremes are 14 areas with per capita out¬ 
lays for the decade of less than $50; 23 with per 
capita outlays ranging from $50 to $99; 49 with 
outlays from $100 to $149; 26 from $150 to $199; 
and 2 from $200 to $250. As might be expected, 
the southern areas are clustered near the bottom 
of the array and most of the New England areas 
near the top. 

Table 4 summarizes the trend in per capita out¬ 
lays from 1929 through 1938. Except for the 
year 1937, median annual costs per inliabitant 
moved steadily upward. In 1929 the rates varied 
from $0.07 in Mobile, Ala., to $4.19 in Boston, 
Mass., with a median rate for the 116 areas of 
$0.87. For half of the areas the per capita rates 
were between $0.47 and $1.30. A graphic com¬ 
parison of these 1929 outlays per inhabitant with 

“ Separate data for work relief are not available for 1938. 


33 




those of 1938 is given in chart 9. The 116 urban 
areas are here arrayed in order of their relative per 
capita payments during the last year of the decade. 
Toledo, Ohio, is at the top, with per capita outlays 
of $53.15. This amount is nearly 13 times the 
maximum rate recorded in 1929. Shreveport, 
La., had the lowest rate of $2,76, or about 39 
times the minimum at the beginning of the decade. 
The median rate of $26.03 was nearly 30 times the 
median for 1929. 


Table 4.-—Extreme, quartile, and median amounts per 
inhabitant ^ of total public and private aid, 116 urban 
areas, 1929-38 


Year 

Lowest 

First 

quartile 

Median 

Third 

quartile 

Highest 

1929-38. 

$21.00 

$85.69 

$122.95 

$149.86 

$252.84 


1929... 

.07 

.47 

.87 

1.30 

4.19 

1930. 

.10 

.61 

1.09 

1.92 

5.98 

1931.. 

.10 

1.06 

2.36 

4. 61 

12.29 

1932... 

.25 

2.07 

4.81 

8.19 

19.99 

1933. 

2.05 

6.31 

9.62 

11.49 

21.69 

1934. 

6.02 

13.05 

16. 51 

20.13 

36.89 

1935. 

2.58 

11.28 

17.37 

22.62 

36.09 

193fi 

2.15 

14.05 

21.48 

27.16 

43.03 

1937. 

1.68 

11.26 

18.47 

23.96 

38.22 

1938___ 

2. 76 

16.99 

26.03 

33.47 

53.15 



1 For 1930, based on total population of areas according to U. S. census of 
that year; for other years, based on total population of areas estimated for 
particular year from U. S. censuses of 1920, 1930, and 1940. 


During the first year of the decade not one of 
the 116 urban areas had a per capita relief ex¬ 
penditure as high as $5.00, and in 29 areas the per 
capita rate was below $0.50. By 1934 not one of 
the areas had a per capita expenditure as low as 
$5.00, and in 11 areas the annual rate was above 
$25.00. By the end of the decade the number of 
areas with expenditure rates above $25.00 had 
risen to 63, and in only Shreveport, La., was the 
outlay per person for public and private aid below 
$5.00. 

Characteristic regional differences in the level 
of relief outlays are revealed in table 5, showing 
the median outlays per inhabitant for areas within 
each of five geographic regions. Prior to the 
period of Federal participation in relief financing 
and administration, the median outlay per inhabi¬ 
tant for New England areas was more than IJ^ 
times that of any other geographic division and 
more than 7 times the median rate for areas in the 
South Atlantic and South Central States. The 
differentials between New England and the Middle 
Atlantic, North Central, and Mountain and Pacific 
regions were not great in 1933 and thereafter, but 
there remained a broad gap between the level of 


per inhabitant outlays in the South and in other 
geographic divisions. 

The annual outlays per inhabitant in the indi¬ 
vidual areas should not be regarded as measuring 
either the relative extent of need or the relative 
level of aid provided in these 116 localities. Both 
these factors help to explain the wide disparity in 
per capita outlays, but the rates are also affected 
by other factors such as relative costs of living 
and the varying extent to which the communities 
have benefited from other kinds of aid omitted 
from the urban series. The rates per inhabitant 
are, of course, considerably affected by differences 
in the character of the urban areas themselves. 
Some of the areas, including many of those in New 
England and the Middle Atlantic States, are 
densely populated and constitute only the core 
of a large metropolitan area, whereas some of the 
other areas, for example Los Angeles County, 
embrace not only a metropolitan area but some 
iniral temtory as well. 

Comparative Outlays for Component Types 
of Aid 

Interarea differences in total per capita outlays 
must inevitably reappear as differences in per 
capita outlays for one or more of the component 
types of aid. The significant fact disclosed by 
table 6 is that the differences are not concentrated 
in one or two segments of the relief structure. 
Annual per capita outlays for every type of aid, 
including the federally financed and operated 
work programs, differ widely in the 116 urban 
areas. 


Table 5 .—Median amount per inhabitant * of total 
public and private aid, 116 urban areas, by five geo~ 
graphic divisions,^ 1929-38 


Year 

New 

England 

Middle 

Atlantic 

North 

Central 

South At¬ 
lantic and 
South 
Central 

Mountain 

and 

Pacific 

Number of areas-... 

18 

23 

36 

29 

10 

1929__ 

$2.22 

$1.02 

$0.92 

$0.29 

$1.04 

1930.. 

3.50 

1.11 

1.29 

.34 

1. 54 

1931.. 

6.04 

3.30 

2.57 

.68 

2.39 

1932.. 

10.19 

6.24 

4.84 

1.37 

4. 78 

1933... 

10.40 

10.69 

9.80 

5.58 

11.11 

1934.... 

16.98 

17.77 

16.77 

9.00 

18.13 

1935.. 

21.09 

23.69 

17. 32 

7.14 

19.61 

1936.... 

22.65 

27.11 

24.01 

8.79 

24. 57 

1937. 

21.15 

23.50 

19.34 

6.65 

23.18 

1938. 

30.05 

27.71 

29.80 

10.46 

28.14 


1 For 1930, based on total population of areas according to U. S. census of 
that year; for other years, based on total population of areas estimated for 
particular year from U. S. censuses of 1920,1930, and 1940. 

* See app. A for urban areas in States in specked geographic divisions. 


34 









































Chart 9 .—Amount per inhabitant of public and private aid, by urban area^ 1929 and 1938 * 


1929 


$5 SO 



S0.70 

1.91 

1.02 

1.09 

1.16 

4.14 

3.41 
1.09 
1.58 
4.19 

.64 

1.42 
.83 
.69 

2.47 

102 

1.41 

1.05 

2.79 
1.50 
1.68 

.56 

.57 

1.16 

3.43 
1.09 
1.16 
1.00 

1.71 
.72 
.87 
.64 

3.54 

1.72 
.54 

2.34 

.90 

2.83 

.57 

.82 

.89 

.89 

.94 

2.09 

.77 

1.19 

.76 

1.31 

.42 

2.80 
1.36 
1.27 

.98 

.61 

.33 

.28 

1.02 

1.30 

sr 

.27 

.71 

1.89 

.91 

.74 

.67 

.51 

132 

1.43 

1.04 

.74 

.86 

.35 

1.50 

.59 

.61 

1.23 

2.09 

.43 

.45 

1.04 

Ml 

.99 

.74 

M3 

.29 

.64 

.92 

l.ll 

.39 

.13 

t.6l 

.80 

1.35 

..15 

t.2d 

.24 

.61 

.33 

.46 

.07 

.43 

30 

.30 

.13 

.40 

.12 

.59 

.10 

.41 

.21 

.86 

.22 

30 

.17 

.30 

.20 

.23 


URBAN AREA 


TOLEDO 

453.15 

KENOSHA 

50.22 

CLEVELAND 

49. 16 

SCRANTON 

48.59 

TERRE HAUTE 

47.81 

LOWELL 

47, 26 

BROCKTON 

46.22 

WILKES-BARRE 

45. 14 

DULUTH 

45.00 

BOSTON 

44.06 

AKRON 

43.41 

ST. PAUL 

39.14 

MINNEAPOLIS 

37.80 

TACOMA 

37.41 

LYNN 

37.37 

FLINT 

36.89 

NEW YORK 

36. 70 

MILWAUKEE 

36.61 

FAU RIVER 

36.30 

SAN FRANCISCO 

35.42 

DETROIT 

35.25 

PITTSBURGH 

35.00 

GRAND RAPIDS 

34.93 

DES MOINES 

34.74 

NEW BEDFORD 

34.62 

EVANSVILLE 

34 .44 

NEWARK 

33.90 

YOUNGSTOWN 

33.60 

OAKLAND 

33.47 

CHICAGO 

33.46 

OMAHA 

33.36 

ALTOONA 

32.82 

CAMBRIDGE 

31 .52 

SPRINGFIELD* MASS 

;. 31.51 

INDIANAPOUS 

30.33 

LAWRENCE 

30.33 

SAN DIEGO 

29.61 

WORCESTER 

29. 76 

ERIE 

29.74 

JOHNSTOWN 

29.47 

COLUMBUS 

29. 27 

DAYTON 

29. 17 

CANTON 

29.08 

MALDEN 

28.67 

SEATTLE 

28.46 

YONKERS 

28.42 

PHILADELPHIA 

28.25 

RACINE 

28.03 

SOUTH BEND 

27.89 

ROCHESTER 

27.85 

DENVER 

27.81 

TRENTON 

27.71 

CINCINNATI 

27.56 

SPRINGFIELD.OHIO 

27.29 

KANSAS CITY. KANS. 27.18 

NEW ORLEANS 

26.77 

SYRACUSE 

26.44 

PONTIAC 

26. 15 

MEDIAN 

26.03 

HUNTINGTON 

25.91 

PROVIDENCE 

25.85 

BUFFALO 

25.64 

SIOUX CITY 

25.45 

JERSEY CITY 

25.20 

BETHLEHEM 

24.61 

ST. LOUIS 

24.59 

MADISON 

24. 57 

SALT LAKE CITY 

23.97 

LOS ANGELES 

23.87 

PORTLAND.OREG. 

23.79 

SPRINGFIELD, ILL. 

23.79 

ALLENTOWN 

23.44 

SAGINAW 

23.25 

KANSAS city, MO. 

23.20 

READING 

22.93 

NEW HAVEN 

22.76 

HARTFORD 

22.48 

NEW ROCHELLE 

22.41 

FORT WAYNE 

21 .92 

SACRAMENTO 

20.48 

NEW BRITAIN 

20.32 

BRIDGEPORT 

19.75 

JACKSONVILLE 

19.68 

UTICA 

19.46 

ATLANTA 

19.29 

WICHITA 

17.99 

TOPEKA 

17.96 

NEWTON 

17.49 

FORT WORTH 

16.82 

CHARLESTON 

16.31 

PORTLAND, ME. 

15.90 

TULSA 

15,44 

ALBANY 

15.26 

BIRMINGHAM 

15. 19 

NIAGARA FALLS 

15.08 

ASHEVILLE 

14. 58 

WASHINGTON,D.C. 

14.53 

CHESTER 

13.91 

WILMINGTON 

13.25 

MOBILE 

12.33 

BALTIMORE 

11.12 

LOUISVILLE 

il. M 

DALLAS 

10.46 

KNOXVILLE 

10.38 

WINSTON-SALEM 

1002 

SAN ANTONIO 

9.62 

RICHMOND 

8.93 

NASHVILLE 

8.50 

MEMPHIS 

8 . 18 

HOUSTON 

7.35 

MIAMI 

7.08 

CHARLOTTE 

6.75 

GREENSBORO 

6.74 

EL PASO 

6 65 

NORFOLK 

6.43 

ROANOKE 

5. 65 

SHREVEPORT 

2. 76 


1938 



I 


i Based on tables C-22 and 0-31. 


35 


I 





















































































































































































































































































The causes underlying the variance in per 
inhabitant rates of expenditure are too complex 
and contradictory to permit any extensive inter¬ 
pretation of the data in qualitative terms. Varia¬ 
tions in per capita outlays for the component types 
of aid are too dependent on the proportionate dis¬ 
tribution of expenditures among the several forms 
of aid to be very useful for measuring changes in 
standards or burdens from one year to another. 
Interarea differences in per capita outlays for 
specific programs are likewise much affected by 
the relative emphasis placed on each segment of 
the relief structure. Thus the wide dispersion in 
per capita outlays for general relief is attributable, 
in part at least, to the wide disparity in standards 
of assistance provided. But it reflects also the 
varying extent to which other forms of public 
assistance have been developed and used to care 
for needy employable persons and the three 
special classes of unemployable dependents. A 
relatively low per capita outlay for general relief 
may mean that an area is not providing adequately 
for needy applicants, or it may mean that rela¬ 
tively high proportions of needy eligibles are being 
cared for under alternative programs affording 
more adequate aid. Avoiding the hazards of 
superficial interpretation of the per capita rates 
for individual communities,^^ attention is focused 
here, as elsewhere in the report, on the extent of 
variation existing among the 116 urban areas. 
The range in amounts per inhabitant expended 

“ Similar hazards exist in interpreting the comparative per capita costs for 
the several types of aid extended within any one community or the differ¬ 
ences among communities in the relative per capita costs of the several types 
of aid. 


for specific types of aid are given in table 6 for 
each year from 1929 through 1938. The number 
of areas reporting some expenditures for given 
types of aid and the median per capita outlays for 
those areas are shown in table 7. 

At the beginning of the decade, per capita out¬ 
lays for all public aid ranged from zero to $3.68 
and for private aid from $0.01 to $1.23. General 
relief outlays per inhabitant ranged from zero to 
$3.03, and outlays for the special types of public 
assistance from zero to $1.05. Median outlays 
per capita for those areas extending the specified 
types of aid in 1929 were $0.66 for all public aid; 
$0.16 for private aid; $0.29 for general relief; and 
$0.31 for the three special types of public as¬ 
sistance. 

In 1938, per inhabitant outlays for all public 
aid ranged from $2.73 to $53.13. General relief 
outlays, dispensed entirely from State and local 
resources, varied from zero in San Antonio, Tex., 
to $15.06 in Philadelphia, Pa. The median outlay 
for areas extending this type of aid was $4.03. 
Special assistance payments, dispensed in most 
areas through joint Federal-State programs, 
ranged from $0.04 in Norfolk, Va., where these 
assistance programs were in an early stage of 
development, to $12.54 in Denver, Colo. The 
median per capita outlay in 1938 was $3.59. 
Earnings on Federal work projects operated by 
the WPA ranged from $0.72 per inhabitant in 
Shreveport, La., to $42.25 per inhabitant in 
Toledo, Ohio; the median per capita outlay for 
WPA earnings in these 116 urban areas was $16.15. 
Expenditures per inhabitant for private aid ranged 


Table 6 .—Range among 116 urban areas in amount per inhabitant * expended for specified types of aid, 1929-38^ 


Public funds 





General relief 






Special types of public assistance 


Private funds 

Year 

Total 

Direct relief 

Work relief 

c; w A ana w rA 
earnings 

Old-age assist¬ 
ance 

Aid to depend¬ 
ent children 

Aid to the blind 




Lowest 

Highest 

Lowest 

Highest 

Lowest 

Highest 

Lowest 

Highest 

Lowest 

Highest 

Lowest 

Highest 

Lowest 

Highest 

Lowest 

Highest 

1929.. 

1030. 

1931 . 

1932 . 

1933 . 

$0.00 

0 

0 

.03 

1.06 

$3.03 
5.06 
10.24 
15. 60 
18.01 

$0.00 

0 

0 

0 

.07 

$3.03 
5.06 
8.49 
13.93 
15.86 

$0.00 

0 

0 

0 

0 

$0.03 
1.69 
3.39 
6. 50 
11.32 

$0.10 

$5.49 

$0.00 

0 

0 

0 

0 

$0.04 

.58 

1.04 

1.46 

1.90 

$0.00 

0 

0 

0 

0 

$1.00 
1.03 
1. 34 
1.49 
1.41 

$0.00 

0 

0 

0 

0 

$0. 35 
.44 
.51 
.50 
.53 

$0.01 

.01 

.01 

.01 

G) 

$1.23 
1.06 
2.54 
5.05 
3.13 

1934. 

2. 34 

27. 21 

.49 

17.17 

.06 

12.07 

1.80 

9.65 

0 

2.22 

0 

1.51 

0 

.27 

0 

1.64 

1935. 

2.00 

29.81 

.39 

22.51 

0 

18.33 

.40 

8.75 

0 

3.11 

0 

1.58 

0 

.34 

0 . 

1.43 

1936_ 

.08 

13.70 

.08 

13. 34 

0 

2.39 

1. 31 

29.95 

0 

5.08 

0 

1.66 

0 

.39 

0 

1.28 

1937... 

0 

12.31 

0 

12. 31 

0 

2.61 

.23 

24.93 

0 

9.67 

0 

1.98 

0 

.48 

0 

1.30 

1938. 

0 

15.06 

W 

G) 

(^) 

(‘) 

.72 

42. 25 

.01 

11.02 

0 

2.71 

0 

.61 

0 

1.24 


> For 1930, based on total population of areas according to U. S. census of » Based on tables C-22—C-3L 

that year; for other years, based on total population of areas estimated for > Less than 1 cent, 

particular year from U. S. censuses of 1020,1030, and 1940. * Figures not available. 


36 













































from zero in 4 areas tp $1.24 in Boston, Mass. 
The median rate for areas reporting expenditures 
from private funds was $0.13. 

The variance in per capita rates is as striking 
for the last year of the decade as for the first. 
Except for private relief, the median rates of 


outlay for areas extending specified types of 
aid have risen sharply under the joint impetus of 
the depression and State and Federal participa¬ 
tion m relief operations, but there has been no 
tendency toward a reduction in the range of per 
capita rates for any form of aid. 


Table 7.—Number of urban areas reporting expenditures for specified types of aid, and median amount per 

inhabitant * expended in those areas, 1929-38 ^ 


Year 

Total 

Public funds 

Private 

funds 

General relief 

CWA 

and 

WPA 

earnings 

Special types of public assistance 

Total 

Direct 

relief 

Work 

relief 

Total 

Old-age 

assistance 

Aid to 
dependent 
children 

Aid to 
the 
blind 


Number of areas reporting expenditures 

, 1929.. 

114 

107 

106 

3 


105 

2 

104 

60 

116 

1930 _ 

115 

110 

109 

18 


106 

9 

106 

62 

116 

i 1931 ___ 

116 

113 

110 

54 


106 

35 

106 

62 

116 

1932 _ 

116 

116 

115 

60 


107 

37 

106 

62 

116 

L SI 1933_ 

116 

116 

116 

94 

116 

107 

38 

106 

62 

116 

V ^1934___ 

116 

116 

116 

116 

116 

106 

74 

104 

74 

113 

( 1935___ 

116 

116 

116 

115 

116 

106 

75 

104 

75 

114 

1936__ 

116 

116 

116 

59 

116 

113 

101 

109 

90 

113 

< 1937___ 

116 

115 

115 

22 

116 

116 

113 

113 

104 

113 

1938---- 

116 

115 

(>) 

(») 

116 

116 

116 

112 

108 

112 

V 

\ 

Median amount per inhabitant 

1929 ..... 

$0.66 

$0.29 

$0.30 

(‘) 


$0.31 

(0 

$0.29 

$0.04 

$0.16 

1930 ___ 

.85 

.46 

.44 

(*) 


.35 

W 

.32 

.05 

.24 

1931 . .- __ 

1.62 

1.25 

.92 

$0.42 


.41 

$0.27 

.34 

.05 

.45 

1932 _ 

4.04 

3.56 

2.47 

.93 


.50 

.61 

.36 

.05 

.45 

1933_ 

9.13 

6.86 

6.60 

1.34 

$1.37 

.48 

.65 

.33 

.06 

.22 

1934_ 

16.19 

10. 67 

6.11 

3.63 

4.90 

.61 

.37 

.36 

.07 

.15 

1935_ 

17.28 

13.76 

7.65 

4.14 

1.73 

1.26 

.95 

.36 

.08 

.13 

1936_ 

21.40 

3.69 

3.44 

.03 

14.28 

1.80 

1.21 

.43 

.06 

.13 

1937_ 

18.41 

3.37 

3.30 

.03 

10.29 

2.99 

2.13 

.66 

.07 

.13 

• 1938_ 

25.98 

4.03 

(’) 

(») 

16.15 

3.59 

2.46 

.84 

.10 

.13 


1 For 1930, based on total population of areas according to U. S. census of 
t that year; for other years, based on total population of areas estimated for 
V particular year from U. S. censuses of 1920, 1930, and 1940. 

1 


3 Data exclude areas with no expenditures for specified types of aid. Based 
on tables C-22—C-31. 

3 Figures not available. 

3 Not computed because of small number of areas. 


. 1 

■, I 

I i 
V 






37 











































































V 


The Present Decade 


No REASON is apparent for believing that 1938 
marked an end to the era of rapid change in the 
realm of public and private aid. Developments 
of the decade ended with that year make it clear 
that large-scale measures for the care and pre¬ 
vention of dependency wdl be necessary for many 
yeare to come. An increasing awareness of the 
long-time factors influencing the spread of de¬ 
pendency and personal insecurity had already 
dictated the initial moves toward an integrated 
long-range program of social security measures to 
augment and gradually replace the emergency relief 
measm-es of the decade reviewed here. 

Intensification of such long-time social and 
economic trends as progressive urbanization, 
greater dependence on industrial employment, 
decreased family solidarity, a declining birth 
rate, and an upward shift in the age distribution 
of the population would ultimately have forced 
drastic revisions of the obsolete relief structure 
in this country as it has in others, but the evolu¬ 
tionary process has been hastened by the unem¬ 
ployment crisis of the early 1930’s. Changes in 
public attitudes toward dependency and in the 
traditional mechanisms and procedures for ex¬ 
tending aid were long overdue; the depression 
hastened their arrival and their application,on a 
broad national scale. 

The decade under review has seen considerable 
experimentation with, and public acceptance of, 
more progressive methods for treating need on a 
mass scale. The prevention and alleviation of 
dependency has become an accepted responsibility 
of the Federal as well as the State and local 
governments. The time has now arrived for 
evaluation of the experience gained and the 
shaping of a continuing program that will retain 
the desirable features of emergency measures and 
eliminate their undesirable aspects. The present 
decade should bring a consolidation and refine¬ 
ment of past advances, based on a critical ap¬ 
praisal of objectives as well as the ways and means 
best adapted to promote the objective set. 


Such a critical survey is beyond the scope of 
the present report. A broad appraisal of past 
experience, present needs, and future goals is now 
in preparation under the auspices of the National 
Resources Planning Board. No attempt has been 
made here to evaluate the influences affecting pat¬ 
terns of urban aid over the decade or to suggest 
any ideal pattern as to combination of programs, 
relative emphasis on different types of aid, or the 
standards of adequacy to be maintained. It 
would be futile, in the face of dynamic economic 
and social readjustments, to attempt any pro¬ 
jection of the expenditure trends for public and 
private aid in these 116 urban areas. The public 
welfare and security structure is stdl in a develop¬ 
mental, transitional stage, and the ultimate 
methods of providing aid and future security are 
not yet fully ciystallized either in legislation or in 
public opinion. The transition from temporary 
to permanent measures was still far from complete 
at the close of the decade under review, although 
nearly 10 years had elapsed since the beginning 
of the unemployment crisis. Even in 1938 the 
major share of aid in the 116 urban areas was 
extended thi’ough WPA projects directed by a 
temporary Federal agency and financed by emer¬ 
gency appropriations. 

While the net effects of future change on 
urban expenditure trends can scarcely be pre¬ 
dicted, there are certain factors already apparent 
that must be reckoned with in the future. These 
factors involve both substantive and procedural 
changes; in general, they suggest the possibility 
that expenditure trends in the individual areas 
may foUow quite diverse courses as efforts are 
made to attain more uniformity in patterns of aid 
and in the standards and levels of care provided 
for various needy groups. 

The most explicit of the factors to be considered 
are legislative changes that were approved shortly 
after the close of the decade. These changes 
include the 1939 revisions in the Social Security 
Act which provided for an extension of Federal 


38 




I 


I 


I 





participation in the financing of the three special 
forms of public assistance and liberalization of the 
old-age insurance program. The unemployment 
compensation provisions of the act were not 
changed basically by the 1939 amendments. 

As of January 1, 1940, the ratio of Federal 
participation in payments for aid to dependent 
children under approved State plans was raised 
from one-third to one-half. The permissible age 
limit for matching individual payments had pre¬ 
viously been raised, at the time the amendments 
were approved in August 1939, from 15 to 17 
years for dependent children who continued in 
school. Also effective as of January 1940 was 
the increase in maximum individual payments 
which may be counted in computing the Federal 
share of payments for old-age assistance and aid 
to the blind in States participating under titles I 
and X of the Social Security Act. Federal funds 
may now be used to pay half of individual monthly 
payments not in excess of $40. The maximum 
was previously $30. 

To be balanced against these legislative changes, 
which will presumably lend impetus to the upward 
trend of public assistance payments, are the amend¬ 
ments to the old-age insurance program which are 
calculated to reduce the future volume of old-age 
dependency. These amendments advanced by 2 
years, or to January 1940, the date for beginning 
.payments of old-age annuities, liberalized eligibil¬ 
ity requirements and average benefit payments 
during the early years of the system, and extended 
the coverage to protect dependents and certain 
survivors of insured workers. The extended func¬ 
tioning of this program and of the unemployment 
compensation programs now operating in every 
State should result in a progressive reduction of 
the incidence of need among the aged and tem¬ 
porarily unemployed. A less predictable factor in 
the future course of public outlays for the aged 
is the strong political drive behind old-age pension 
movements of various kinds. 

Proposals for further substantive changes in the 
public assistance titles of the Social Security Act 
center about the extent and basis of Federal 
financial participation, more particularly on the 
possibility of adjusting Federal grants-in-aid to 
promote greater equalization of treatment under 
different programs and in different geographic 
areas. The Social Security Board has repeatedly 
recommended the adoption of some variable-grant 


procedure ‘ to pemiit relatively more Federal aid to 
States with low economic and fiscal capacities. 
Attention has also been directed to the need for 
attaining more equality of treatment within States. 
Recurrent proposals for Federal participation in 
the financing of general relief likewise focus on the 
disparity in standards and levels of care provided 
by the States and localities, and their varying 
economic ability to support an adequate program 
of general relief. A Federal grant-in-aid program 
is urged as a means of raising general relief stand¬ 
ards in States and localities where they are dispro¬ 
portionately low, and also as a means for bringing 
general relief payments and conditions of aid more 
equitably in line with those for other assistance 
and work programs. 

The diversity and lack of consistent and logical 
relationships in eligibility requirements, levels of 
care, and methods of extending aid imder the 
programs now in operation constitute major prob¬ 
lems of integration to be resolved. A satisfactor}’' 
solution entails both the elimination of unwar¬ 
ranted geographic differences under specific pro¬ 
grams and the attainment of more explicit, equi¬ 
table, and stable relationships among all programs 
extending aid to needy persons. It involves, also, 
the preservation of a soimd balance among the 
social insurance programs and the public assistance 
and employment programs that will foster the 
development of preventive measures and at the 
same time afford adequate levels of care for those 
in immediate need of direct assistance.^ 

A second insistent problem of integration to be 
faced during the present decade is that of simpli¬ 
fying and coordinating the complex administra¬ 
tive and supervisory relationships that now hamper 
the efficient functioning of the relief and welfare 
structure. Part of the existing complexity arises 
from, and is perpetuated by, the mixture of 
temporary and permanent agencies. Part of it is 
the result of a division of authority and responsi¬ 
bility among Federal, State, and local governments 
without sufficient coordinated relationships and 
procedures to ensure the efficient and flexible 
performance of the structure as a whole. 

1 Such action was recommended initially by the Board in Message From the 
President of the United States Transmitting a Report of the Social Security Board 
Recommending Changes in the Social Security Act, H. Doc. 110, 76th Cong., 
Istsess., p. 21. 

» Compare, on this point. Brown, J. Douglas, “Some Inherent Problems 
of Social Security,” and Burns, Eveline M., “An Appraisal of Services for the 
Unemployed,” The Annals, American Academy of Political and Social 
Science, Vol. 202 (March 1939), pp. 1-7 and 46-62. 


39 





The potential applicant for public aid is today 
confronted with an elaborate maze of agencies 
and regulations governing the form and amounts 
of aid available to him and his dependents. He 
may find himself eligible for aid under two or more 
different programs or unable to qualify for any. 
Even if he is nominally eligible for a given pro- 
gi’am, he may be denied aid or transferred to some 
less adequate form of aid if available financial 
resources are limited.^ 

The confusion, overlapping, and gaps in the 
present structure of public aid call for progressive 
coordination of Federal and Federal-State pro¬ 
grams with those residual forms of aid left to State 
and local responsibility. Efforts toward simplifi¬ 
cation and integration must proceed at each level 


’ For a graphic description of conditions in one community, see Qeddes, 
Anne E., “Relief Trends in Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1929-37,” Social Secu¬ 
rity Bulletin, Vol. 1, No. 8 (August 1938), pp. 17-22. 


of government and must extend to all public 
assistance, work, and social insurance programs if 
they are to result in a smoothly functioning mech¬ 
anism for preventing and alleviating need. 

The present decade may not involve any such 
abrupt and startling departures from existing 
relief trends as characterized the early 1930’s, but 
it will inevitably bring evolutionary changes and 
internal adjustments of far reaching significance. 
In order to maintain a continuous record of those 
changes as they affect expenditure patterns and 
trends in the 116 urban areas, it is planned to 
issue supplements to the present report, extending 
the basic data for individual areas and interpret¬ 
ing them against the background of past years. 
The first such supplement, covering 1939 and 1940, 
consists of the discussion beginning on page 41, 
and appendix D, which contains tabular data for 
these years. 


40 





r 

Supplement for 1939 and 1940 


Tbe years 1939 and 1940 brought substantial de¬ 
clines in aggregate expenditures for assistance 
payments and work program earnings in the 116 
urban areas (chart 10). In 1939 a sharp drop in 
WPA earnings reduced total annual expenditures 
to $1.3 bUlion, or 11 percent less than the record 
outlay of the previous year. Aggregate outlays 
for the following year were 16 percent below those 
for 1939 because of another marked decline in 
annual WPA earnings and a sizable contraction in 
expenditures for general relief. The 1940 total 
of somewhat less than $1.1 billion was the smallest 
annual expenditure in these lu-ban areas since 
1935. During 1939 and 1940 new provisions with 
I regard to the WPA program, amendments liberal- 
5 izing the Social Security Act, the creation of the 
f Federal Security Agency and the Federal Works 
f Agency, initiation of a Federal unemployment in- 
surance program for railroad workers, and the 


inaugm-ation of the food and cotton stamp pro¬ 
grams of the Surplus Marketing Administration 
affected the structure of public aid and related 
social insurance programs and will presumably 
influence that structure for years to come. 

The total amounts expended for the various 
types of aid in the 116 areas combined during 1939 
and 1940, the cumulative amounts for the 12- 
year period 1929-40, and tbe percentage distribu¬ 
tion for each of these periods are shown in table 8. 
Annual data for 1939 and 1940 for individual 
areas appear in tables D-2—D-7, which show 
absolute expenditures, percentage distributions of 
these outlays, and amounts spent per inhabitant. 

Trends in Monthly Expenditures 

By September 1939 the composite expenditure 
curve had dropped 34 percent from the all-time 
peak which was reached in December 1938. It 


Chart 10 .—Expenditures for public and private aid, 116 urban areas, January 1929-Deceniber 1940 > 





MILLIONS OF DOLLARS 
140 -- 


MILLIONS OF DOLLARS 
140 

120 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 

0 


' Based on tables C-1 and D-1. 

t Earnings of all persons employed under the Civil Works Program, including the administrative staff. 
ttEarnings on projects operated by the WPA within the areas. 

41 
























































turned upward again during the last quarter of 
the year and continued to rise gradually until 
April 1940, when there began a brief downward 
movement extending through June. During the 
last half of 1940 total monthly outlays remained 
fairly stable, varying between $83 million and 
$88 million. 

The decline in the total expenditure curve from 
March thi'ough September of 1939 was obviously 
caused by the sharp curtailment in WPA outlays. 
This curtailment was induced partly by improved 
economic conditions and partly by a cut in the 
WPA appropriation to an amount one-thud less 
than that provided in the preceding fiscal year. 
A decline in WPA earnings was well under way 
even before the Emergency Relief Appropriation 
Act was passed in June 1939; between June and 
September monthly earnings in the 116 urban 
areas contracted sharply from $64 million to $40 
million. 

Reduction in WPA pay rolls during this period 
was necessitated not only by the reduction in 
available funds but by a mandatory provision of 
the new appropriation act calling for the removal 
from WPA jobs by August 31, 1939, of all relief 
workers, other than veterans, who had been em¬ 
ployed continuously for more than 18 months. 
Workers still in need after a lapse of 30 days could 
be recertified for WPA employment but could 


not necessarily be reassigned immediately to 
projects. The existence in some areas of long 
waiting lists of certified workers and the reduced 
employment quotas in all areas precluded the 
possibility of reassignment of many needy workers. 
As a result, many of those removed from WPA 
jobs applied for general relief during this period, 
but the stringency of funds in many States and 
localities prevented expansion commensurate with 
the increased demand for aid. 

WPA earnings in the urban areas moved upward 
in all but one month of the period October 1939- 
March 1940, although they remained markedly 
below the monthly expenditures for this type of 
aid in the first half of 1939. Such earnings de¬ 
clined once more during the second quarter of 
1940 and by June were not much above the 
$40-million level of September 1939. 

For the fiscal year 1940-41 the WPA received 
an initial appropriation which was again about 
one-third smaller than that for the previous year.* 
The Emergency Relief Appropriation Act for 
1940-41 ^ provided, however, that WPA funds 
might be apportioned over a shorter period of 

■ A supplemental appropriation approved in March 1941 brought the total 
WPA appropriation for the fiscal year to a point about one-ninth below the 
total for 1939-40. 

» The 1941 Emergency Relief Appropriation Act was designated as of the 
fiscal year for which it appropriated funds; previous ERA acts were desig¬ 
nated as of the calendar years in which they were enacted. 


Table 8 .—Amount and percentage distribution of public and private assistance and earnings under specified Federal 

work programs, 116 urban areas, 1939 and 1940 


Type of assistance 

Amount 

Percentage distribution 

1929-40 

1939 

1940 

1929-AO 

1939 

1940 

Total, public and private funds *___ 

$9,197,431,732 

$1,273,294,901 

$1,071,134,160 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

Public funds, total_______ 

8,943,845,664 

1,262, 553,813 

1,060, 760,436 

97.3 

99.1 

99.0 

General relief, total __ 

3,672, 740,758 

329,927,667 

283,623,437 

40.0 

25.9 

26.5 

Direct relief ____ 

> 3,032,068,021 

(‘) 

(*) 

»33.0 



Work relief- ___ _ 

3 640,672,737 

W 

0) 

3 7.0 

0) 

0) 

Earnings under Federal work programs: 







Civil Works Program *_ _ 

301,249,695 



3.3 



Projects operated by the WPA «____ 

3, 784,135, 136 

710,822,610 

526, 570,526 

41.1 

55.8 

49.1 

Special types of public assistance, total'_ 

1,185, 720,076 

221,803, 536 

260, 566,473 

12.9 

17.4 

23.4 

Old-age assistance_ ____ 

735, 096,603 

155,408,631 

177,995, 592 

8.0 

12.2 

16.6 

Aid to dependent children_ _ .. 

395, 245,465 

57,662,628 

63,346,637 

4.3 

4.5 

5.9 

Aid to the blind--_ ___ 

55,378,007 

8, 732,277 

9,224,244 

.6 

.7 

.9 

Private funds *_____ 

253,586,068 

10,741,088 

10,373, 724 

2.7 

.9 

1.0 


> Excludes cost of administration; of materials, equipment, and other items 
incident to operation of work programs; and of transient care. For 1940, 
figures for assistance programs differ from those published for previous years 
in that they include obligations incurred for burials, in addition to obliga¬ 
tions incurred for money payments, assistance in kind, medical care, and 
hospitalization. 

s Includes statutory aid to veterans administered on basis of need. See 
also footnote 1. 

* Work relief for 1938-40 included with direct relief, since separate figures 
are not available; information indicates that work relief represents a negligible 
proportion of general relief in these years. 

< Figures not available. 


» Figures from the WPA, Division of Statistics; represent earnings of all 
persons employed under the program, including the administrative staff. 
Terminated in 1934. 

« Figures from the WPA, Division of Statistics; represent earnings of per¬ 
sons employed on projects operated by the WPA within these areas; figures 
are not available for earnings of persons employed on projects other than 
those operated by the WPA. 

’’ Includes figures for areas in States with plans approved by the Social 
Security Board and for areas in States not participating imder the Social 
Security Act. See also footnote 1. 

* Includes direct and work relief and aid to veterans. See also footnote 1. 


42 





























not less than 8 months if the unemployment situ¬ 
ation warranted such action. Under the impetus 
of the defense program, employment increased 
substantially dm-ing the last half of 1940 but the 
volume of unemployment remained large, as is 
indicated by the fact that the number of applica¬ 
tions for jobs in the active file of the United States 
Employment Service, an admittedly incomplete 
measure of unemployment, stood at 4.8 million at 
the close of the year. It was necessary, therefore, 
to maintain WPA employment at a higher level 
than would have been possible if the appropriation 
had been apportioned over the full 12 months of 
the fiscal year. During the last 6 months of 1940, 
WPA pay rolls in the 116 urban areas remained 
approximately at the level to which they had 
declined in June. Outlays for WPA earnings for 
the final month of 1940 were only half those for 
December 1938: 

After moving upward in the first quarter of 
1939, monthly expenditures for general relief 
declined in each of the next 4 months. Total 
outlays rose somewhat from July to August but 
fluctuated only slightly during the balance of 
the year. Although the expansion which had 
been recorded for the last quarter of each of the 3 
preceding years was absent in 1939, the average 
monthly outlay for the latter year was slightly 
higher than that for 1938. A temporary advance 
in total payments in January 1940 was followed 
by a steady movement toward a lower level of 
expenditures. In the last 4 months of the year 
the amounts expended were the smallest since 
the summer of 1937. General rehef payments 
in the urban areas in December 1940 were less 
than $22 million, as compared with $27 million 
in December 1938. 

In contrast to the unsettled course of expendi¬ 
tures for WPA earnings and general relief was the 
steady growth of payments for the three special 
types of public assistance. By December 1940 
combined monthly outlays for these types of aid 
had reached $22 million, or 26 percent more than 
in December 1938. From the last month of 
1938 to December 1940, monthly expenditures 
for old-age assistance increased 26 percent, for 
aid to dependent children 28 percent, and for 
aid to the blind 11 percent. 

It is not possible to measure the effect on the 
monthly expenditure curves of the more liberal 


provisions for Federal participation which be¬ 
came effective January 1, 1940,® but it would 
appear that in the urban areas the impetus to 
increased expenditures was greater for old-age 
assistance than for aid to dependent children. 
From December 1938 to December 1939 monthly 
outlays for old-age assistance rose 9 percent; 
from December 1939 to December 1940 the in¬ 
crease amounted to 16 percent. For aid to de¬ 
pendent children, the increase was 13 percent in 
both instances. The latter half of 1940, however, 
witnessed an acceleration in the rate of growth 
in payments for aid to dependent children, where¬ 
as the rate of expansion in old-age assistance 
declined somewhat. Monthly expenditures for 
aid to dependent children increased only 4 percent 
from December 1939 to June 1940, but expanded 

9 percent from June to December 1940. During 
these two 6-month periods monthly payments 
for old-age assistance rose 9 and 7 percent, 
respectively. 

Combined annual expenditures for the special 
types of public assistance rose 12 percent in 1939 
and 13 percent in 1940. In the first of these 
years, old-age assistance expanded 10 percent, aid 
to dependent children 20 percent, and aid to the 
blind 9 percent. For 1940, the increases amounted 
to 15 percent for old-age assistance, 10 percent for 
aid to dependent children, and 6 percent for aid to 
the blind. In 1939, the rates of growth in old-age 
assistance and aid to dependent children in the 
urban areas differed only slightly from the rates 
of expansion in these programs in the continental 
United States, but in 1940 there were sizable differ¬ 
ences in the urban-area and national rates. The 
national rate of increase in old-age assistance was 

10 percent in both 1939 and 1940. For aid to 
dependent children, the rate of expansion in the 
country as a whole was 18 percent in 1939 and 16 
percent in 1940. In both 1939 and 1940, pay¬ 
ments for aid to the blind increased at approxi¬ 
mately the same rate in the 116 urban areas and 
in the Nation. 

During 1939 and 1940, monthly outlays for 
private aid followed much the same seasonal 
pattern as in 1938, although aggregate payments 
declined somewhat in both years. Annual expend¬ 
itures from private funds decreased 1.7 percent in 
1939 and 3.4 percent in 1940. 

* See p. 39. 


452436 “— 42 - 


43 






Per Capita Outlays 

The median amount spent per inhabitant for 
public and private aid in the 116 urban areas 
dropped to $23.36 in 1939 and $19.15 in 1940.^ 
The median outlay in the latter year was almost 
$7 below that for 1938. As in previous years, 
there were marked regional differences in per 
capita relief burdens. The New England areas 
showed the highest median rate of expenditure in 
both 1939 and 1940—$28.22 and $26.61, respec¬ 
tively; and the South Atlantic and South Central 
areas the lowest—$10.83 in 1939 and $11.15 in 
1940. Median amounts spent per inhabitant in 
the other geographic divisions were as follows: 
Mountain and Pacific, 1939—$26.05, 1940^— 
$24.71; North Central, 1939—$25.80, 1940— 
$21.03; and Middle Atlantic, 1939—$24.21, 1940— 
$19.08. 

Among the 116 areas, the range in per capita 
expenditures for total public and private aid in 
1939 was from $4.19 to $44.78, and in 1940 from 
$4.88 to $40.37. Annual outlays per inhabitant 
for half of the areas were between $16.70 and 
$29.11 in the first of these years and between 
$13.79 and $25.59 in 1940 (tables D-6 and D-7). 
Median per capita expenditures for component 
types of aid in the 2 years, calculated on the basis 
of areas reporting some payments for a given type 
of aid, were as follows: WPA earnings, 1939— 
$13.10, 1940—$10.01; public general relief, 1939— 
$3.91, 1940—$3.56; and the special types of public 
assistance, 1939—$4.15, 1940—$4.49. For pri¬ 
vate relief, the rate was $0.13 in both years. The 
median amount spent per inhabitant for old-age 
assistance rose from $2.46 in 1938 to $2.78 in 1939 
and $3.02 in 1940, and that for aid to dependent 
children from $0.84 in 1938 to $1.01 and $1.17 in 
the 2 succeeding years. For aid to the blind, the 
median rate remained constant at $0.10 for each 
of these years. 

Legislative and Administrative Developments 

The most important legislative developments 
affecting relief expenditures during 1939 were 
the changes in WPA employment and wage 
policies set forth in the Emergency Relief Appro¬ 
priation Act of 1939. In addition to the provisions 
already described, the act established various 

* Per capita amounts for 1939 are based on population data estimated from 
the censuses of 1930 and 1940; those for 1940 are based on data from the census 
of that year. 


restrictions and priorities in WPA employment, 
called for a revised schedule of monthly earnings, 
and altered the conditions governing sponsors’ 
contributions to WPA projects.^ For non-Federal 
projects approved after January 1, 1940, State and 
local contributions were required to average, on a 
State-wide basis, not less than 25 percent of the 
total cost of projects. 

Provisions of the ERA Act of 1939 governing 
the operation of the WPA program were in 
general continued by the ERA Act for 1940^1. 
The later act differed from its predecessor mainly 
in the inclusion of a number of specific provisions 
intended to facilitate the cooperation of the WPA 
in the defense program. All projects certified 
by the Secretaiy of War or the Secretary of the 
Navy as important for military or naval purposes 
were exempted from certain provisions applying 
to other projects. Certified defense projects were 
exempted from the requirement that sponsors’ 
contributions represent at least 25 percent of 
total project costs within each State, and from 
the limitation of an average of $6 per month per 
worker during the fiscal year on Federal expendi¬ 
tures for nonlabor costs in any State. Authority 
was also given the WPA to supplement usual 
Federal allowances for nonlabor costs up to a 
maximum of $25 million in the furtherance of 
defense projects. Other exemptions pertaining 
to such projects authorized departures from the 
regular schedule of monthly earnings and hours of 
work, and the maximum limitation on the amount 
the WPA was permitted to spend for work on any 
public bunding. The participation of the WPA 
in activities contributing to defense was also 
extended by the Second Deficiency Appropriation 
Act of 1940, which authorized the use of funds 
appropriated to that agency by the ERA Act for 
1940-41 for training workers for manual occupa¬ 
tions in industries engaged in production for 
national defense purposes. 

The liberalizing amendments to the public 
assistance and old-age insurance titles of the 
Social Security Act passed in August 1939 have 
already been described.® Creation of the Federal 
Security Agency and the Federal Works Agency 


‘ For a more detailed description of the provisions affecting WPA opera¬ 
tions in 1939 and 1940, see Report on Progress of the WPA Program, June 30, 
1939, pp. 8-14, and Report'on Progress of the WPA Program, June 30, 1940, 
pp. 10-14. 

® See p. 39. For an account of the amendments to the Social Security Act, 
see Fourth Annual Report of the Social Security Board, 1939, pp. 166-180. 


44 




under the President’s Reorganization Plan No. I 
represented significant steps taken in 1939 toward 
the integration of Federal activities relating to 
relief and unemployment. Grouped within the 
first of these agencies were the Civilian Conserva¬ 
tion Corps, the National Youth Administration, 
the Office of Education, the Public Health Service, 
and the Social Security Board,^ Included in the 
Federal Works Agency were the Public Buildings 
Administration, the Public Roads Administration, 
the Public Works Administration, the United 
States Housing Authority, and the Work Projects 
Administration. 

The first reorganization plan provided also for 
the consolidation of the United States Employ¬ 
ment Service with the program for unemployment 
compensation under the Social Security Act, by 
transferring this service, hitherto in the Depart- 
^ ment of Labor, to the Social Security Board. The 
' scope of State unemployment compensation pro- 
. grams was altered somewhat in 1939 by the initia- 
‘i tion of operations under the Federal system of 
unemployment insurance for railroad workers pro¬ 
vided for by legislation enacted in the previous 
year. Wlien benefits under the Railroad Unem¬ 
ployment Insurance Act became payable in July 
1939 some 1.5 million workers formerly covered by 
State programs were transferred to the new Federal 
^ system administered by the Railroad Retirement 
|n|^Board, which carries responsibility for the Federal 
’ retirement program for aged and disabled railroad 
workers. 

During 1939 a development of potential impor- 
ilH tance to the urban relief picture was the inaugura- 
tion by the Federal Surplus Marketing Adminis- 
tration of the stamp plan for distribution of sui-plus 
foods to persons eligible for public aid. The new 
procedure, established experimentally in Roches- 
M ter, N. Y., in May 1939, provided for the dis- 
it- j tribution of surplus foods to needy persons through 
Iff; normal trade channels instead of direct distribution 
through central commissaries or other relief 
channels. The plan was intended also to increase 
the total food consumption of relief families by 
making sure that surplus commodities were 
received in addition to, and not in lieu of, normal 
relief allowances for food. In general, the stamp 
plan allowed certified relief families to purchase, 
from their regular relief payments, orange- 

^ Additional functions and agencies were placed in the Federal Security 
Agency by the second and fourth reorganization plans. 


colored food stamps in values ranging from $1.00 
to $1.50 a week per person; for each dollar’s worth 
of orange-colored stamps purchased, the family 
received 50 cents’ worth of blue stamps which 
could be used to purchase commodities currently 
listed as surplus by the Department of Agriculture. 

Favorable experience with the stamp plan in 
Rochester led to its gradual extension during the 
balance of the year. In 1940 the plan was ex¬ 
tended rapidly and by the close of the year was in 
operation in 231 areas.® These areas included part 
or all of the territory covered by 71 of the 116 areas 
represented in the urban series. 

In May 1940 the Surplus Marketing Administra¬ 
tion initiated another stamp progi*am designed to 
stimulate the consumption of cotton goods and to 
increase the ability of families eligible for or 
receiving public aid to purchase such goods. The 
mechanism of the cotton stamp plan was patterned 
after that employed in the operation of the food 
stamp plan. By December the program was in 
effect in 10 areas, including 7 of the 116 urban areas. 

While the extent to which the defense program 
would ultimately reduce unemployment and the 
need for public aid was hardly discernible at the 
end of 1940, certain implications for the immediate 
future were fairly clear. It was apparent, for 
example, that even a marked increase in employ¬ 
ment would have only limited and, in large part, 
indirect effect upon the need for assistance to groups 
of unemployable persons represented by recipients 
of the special types of public assistance and a sub¬ 
stantial proportion of the general relief load. Most 
of those employed on WPA projects lacked the 
occupational skills and semiskills requisite to 
employment in defense production, and there was 
a strong presumption that this lack characterized 
also the larger body of unemployed persons who 
were not receiving public aid. In recognition of 
the widespread lack of suitable skills among those 
comprising the labor reserve, a federally financed 
training program, begun on a small scale at the 
outset of the defense program, had been consider¬ 
ably expanded before the end of 1940. 

It was likewise evident that the impact of 
defense production upon the States and local com¬ 
munities would be very uneven because of the 
high degree of geographic concentration of defense 

* A stamp plan area may be a city, county, or group of counties. Summary 
data on the food stamp plan have been published monthly in the Social Secu¬ 
rity Bulk tin since September 1940. 


45 






contracts. Although increased purchasing power 
arising from defense employment initially stimu¬ 
lated expansion in consumer-goods industries and 
served to diflPuse the expansion induced by defense 
expenditmes, it was clear that the magnitude of 
defense requirements would eventually necessitate 
curtailment in production of consumer goods. 
Areas relying for their economic activity on con¬ 
sumer-goods industries thus adversely affected 
may face serious problems of industrial disloca¬ 
tion and accompanying unemployment. 

The need for looking ahead to the period of 


readjustment after the defense program is com¬ 
pleted was recognized in the authority given the 
National Resources Planning Board in June 1940 
to develop plans for a large-scale public works 
program to be held in readiness for implementation 
in the post-defense period. Whatever the reper¬ 
cussions of the defense program upon relief needs 
and unemployment in the interim, it is a reason¬ 
able assertion that an adequate and well inte¬ 
grated system of public aid and social insurance 
will prove a substantial factor in public morale in 
a time of national emergency. 


46 


APPENDIX A 

Area and population of 116 urban areas, by geographic division and State 


Geographic division. State, 
and urban area 

County to which 
reports relate > 

Population of area 
to which reports 
relate 

1930 

census 

1940 

census 

New England 
C onnecticut; 




Bridgeport. 


146,716 
164,072 
68,128 
162,655 
70,810 

147,121 
166,267 
68,685 
160,605 
73,643 

Hartford.... 


New Britain__ 


New Haven_ 


Maine; Portland_ 


Massachusetts: 


Boston..... 


781,188 
63,797 

770,816 
62,343 
110,879 
115,428 
84,323 
101,389 
98,123 
58,010 
110,341 
69,873 
149, 554 
193,694 
253,504 

Brockton.. 


Cambridge__ 


113,' 643 
115, 274 
85,068 
100, 234 
102, 320 
58,036 
112, 597 

Fall River__ 


Lawrence__ 


Lowell.... 


Lynn_ 


Malden.... 


New Bedford... 


Newton____ 


65; 276 
149,900 
195,311 
252,981 

Springfield...__ 


Worcester... 


Rhode Island: Providence_ 


MroDLE Atlantic 


New Jersey: 




Jersey City___ 


316,715 
442,337 
123,356 

301,173 

Newark__ 


429', 760 
124,697 

Trenton_ 


New York: 


Albany__ 


127,412 
762, 408 
54,000 
6,930,446 
75,460 
328,132 
209, 326 
101,740 
134, 646 

130, 577 
798,377 
58,408 
7,454,995 
78,029 
324,975 
205,967 
100,518 
142, 598 

Buffalo__ 

Erie_ . 

New Rochelle.__ 


New York__ 


Niagara Falls... 


Rochester.. 


Syracuse >_ 

(*)..... 

Utica... 


Yonkers_ 


Pennsylvania; 


Allentown__ 

Lehigh .. . 

172,893 
139, 840 
169, 304 
280, 264 
175,277 
203,146 

177,533 
140, 358 
168,959 
310,756 
180, 889 
213, 459 
1,931, 334 
1, 411, 539 
241,884 
301, 243 

Altoona_ 

Blair.__ 

Bethlehem___ 

Northampton.... 

Chester_ 

Delaware 

Erie__ 

Erie. 

Johnstown... 

Cambria_ 

Philadelphia__ 

Philadelphia *_ 

1,950; 961 
1,374,410 

Pittsburgh_ 

Allegheny_ 

Reading_ 

Berks_ 

■ 231', 717 
310,397 
445,109 

Scranton... 

Lackawanna_ 

Wilkes-Barre... 

Luzerne_ 

441, 518 

North Central* 
Illinois: 


Chicago... 

Cook_ 

3,982,123 
111, 733 

4,063,342 
117,912 

Springfield___ 

Sangamon_ 



Indiana: 




Evansville___ 

Vanderburgh. 

113,320 

130,783 

Fort Wayne_ 

Allen_ 

146,743 
422,666 

160,033 

155,084 
460,926 

161,823 

Indianapolis_ 

Marion_ 

South Bend_ 

St. Joseph_ 

Terre Haute_ 

Vigo_ 

98,861 

99 ; 709 

Iowa: 


Des Moines_ 

Polk. 

172,837 
101,669 

195,835 
103,627 

Sioux City_ 

Woodbury_ 

Kansas: 


Kansas City_ 

Wyandotte.... 

141, 211 

145,071 

Topeka_’... 

Shawnee_ 

85,200 

91, 247 

Wichita. _ 

Sedgwick_ 

136,330 

143,311 

Michigan: 


Detroit_ 

Wayne_ 

1,888,946 
211,641 
240, 511 
211, 251 

2,015,623 

Flint ___ 

Geiiesee _ 

227,944 

GrATiii Rapids . 

Kent_ 

246, 338 

Pontiac .. _ 

Oakland_ 

254,068 

Saginaw_ 

Saginaw.. 

120, 717 

130,468 



Minnesota: 



206, 917 


St. Louis... 

204, 596 

Minneapolis_ 

Hennepin__ 

517,785 

568,899 

Rt. Paul . 

Ramsey_ 

286,721 

309, 935 




1 When no county is specified, reports relate to city. Differences in terri¬ 
tory to which certain reported figures of particular urban areas relate are 
indicated in tables in which these figures appear. 

> Represents 6 counties: Bronx, Kings, New York, Queens, and Richmond. 

* At the beginning of 1939 reporting area was changed from city to 
Onondaga County, which had a population of 295,108 in 1940. 

* City coextensive with county. ^ 

* Represents States grouped under East North Central and West North 
Central of U. 8. census geographic divisions. 


Geographic division. State, 
and urban area 

County to which 
reports relate > 

Population of area 
to which reports 
relate 

1930 

census 

1040 

census 

North Central—C ontinued 
Missouri: 




Kansas City_ 

Jackson . 

470,454 

1,033,533 
232,982 

477 ,828 

St. Louis... . __ 

(i) 

1,090,278 

Nebraska: Omaha_ 

Douglas_ 

247,662 

Ohio: 


Akron___ 

Summit.. . .. _ 

344,131 
221,784 
589,356 

1, 201,455 
361,055 
273,481 
90,936 
347,709 
236,142 

339, 406 

Canton.. 

Stark ___ 

234,887 

Cincinnati. 

Hamilton__ 

621,987 

Cleveland... 

Cnvahnga 

1,217, 250 

Columbus_ 

Franklin_ . 

388, 712 

Dayton...... 

Montgomery 

295,480 
95,647 

Springfield.. 

Clark_ 

Toledo_ 

Lucas__ 

344,333 

Youngstown... 

Mahoning.. ___ 

240,251 

Wisconsin: 


Kenosha__ 

Kenosha_ 

63, 277 
112,737 
725, 263 
90,217 

63, 505 
130,660 
766,885 

Madison..__ 

Dane__ 

Milwaukee__ 

Milwaukee_ 

Racine... 

Racine__ . 

94,047 

South Atlantic and South 
Central ^ 

Alabama: 


Birmingham... 

Jefferson_ 

431,493 
118,363 
161,032 

459,930 

Mobile..... 

Mobile _ _. . . 

141,974 
179, 562 

Delaware: Wilmington_ 

New Castle__ 

District of Columbia: Wash- 


ington__ 

(S).. 

486, 869 

663,091 

Florida: 


Jacksonville... 

Duval.. 

155, 603 

210,143 

Miami_ 

Dade_ .. 

142,966 
359,963 

267,739 

Georgia: Atlanta •_ 

Fulton 1 * and part 0 

421,880 

Kentucky: Louisville. 

Atlanta in De Kalb 
County.® 

Jefferson... 

355, 350 

385, 392 

Louisiana: 


New Orleans_ 

Orleans u iJ 

458, 762 
124,670 

494,637 
150,203 
859,100 

Shreveport__ 

Caddo u.. 

Maryland: Baltimore_ 


804,874 

North Carolina: 


Asheville.. 

Buncombe___ 

97,937 
127,971 
133,010 
111, 681 
187, 674 
101,050 

108,765 
151,826 
153, 916 
126, 476 
193, 363 
121,105 

Charlotte... 

Mecklenburg_ 

Greensboro_ 

Guilford_ 

Winston-Salem_ 

Forsyth__ . 

Oklahoma: Tulsa...__ 

Tulsa... .. 

South Carolina: Charleston_ 

Charleston_ 

Tennessee: 



Knoxville_ 

Knox_... 

165, 902 
306, 482 
222,854 

178, 468 
368, 250 
267, 267 

Memphis__ 

Shelby...... 

Nashville_ 

Davidson_ 

Texas: 


Dallas_ 

Dallas.. 

325,691 
131, 597 
197, 553 
359, 328 
292, 633 

398, 664 
131,067 
225, 521 
528,961 

El Paso_ 

El Paso_ 

Fort Worth_ 

Tarrant... 

Houston_ 

Harris_ 

San Antonio_ 

Bexar___ 

338; 176 

Virginia: 


Norfolk_ _ 


129, 710 
182,929 
69,206 
90,786 

144, 332 
193,042 
69,287 
97,469 

Richmond .. _ 


Roanoke__ 


West Virginia: Huntington.... 

Cabell. 

Mountain and Pacific 

\ 



California: 




Los Angeles_ 

Los Angeles. 

2, 208,492 
474,883 
141,999 
209,659 

2, 785,643 
613, oil 
170,333 
289, 348 
634, 536 
322,412 
355,099 
211,623 

Oakland 

Alameda_ 

Sacramento_ 

Sacramento.. 

San Diego_ 

San Diego_ 

San Francisco_ 

San Francisco < 

634; 394 
287,861 
338, 241 
194,102 

463, 617 

Colorado: Danvp.r 

Denver *.. _ 

Oregon: Portland_ 

Multnomah... 

Utah: Salt Lake City_ 

Salt Lake.. .. 

Washington: 

Seattle_ 

King___ 

504, 980 
182,081 

Taooma ... _ 

Pierce_ 

163; 842 




• Reports relate to both independent city of St. Louis and St. Louis County. 
’ Represents States grouped under South Atlantic, East South Central, 

and West South Central of U. S. census geographic divisions. 

• City of Washington coextensive with District of Columbia. 

» At the beginning of 1940 reporting area was changed to Fulton County and 
all of De Kalb County, which had a combined population of 479,828 in 1940. 
m Includes former Campbell and Milton Counties, 
u Parish. 

>» City coextensive with parish. 


























































































































































































































APPENDIX B 


COMPARATIVE EXPENDITURE PATTERNS FOR 116 URBAN AREAS, 1929-38 


The series of charts presented in the following pages 
affords a comparison of monthly expenditures for public 
and private aid in the individual urban areas over the 10- 
year period 1929-38. The charts are designed to reveal 
interarea differences in patterns of expenditure as well as 
differences in trends and have therefore been standardized 
for mass; that is, they have been constructed in such a 
way that the shaded expanse under the total expenditure 
curve is identical for all the urban areas. Interarea differ¬ 
ences in the magnitude of total expenditures are thereby 
subordinated to differences in timing and in the relative 
emphasis placed on component programs and types of aid. 

In constructing the series of charts, a standard height on 
the vertical scale was used in every instance to represent 
the average monthly expenditure in the urban area for all 
types of aid over the 120-month period. The arrow on 
each chart marks this height and indicates the value of the 
10-year monthly average expenditure for the individual 
area. The separate diagrams can thus be read accurately 
from independent dollar scales and at the same time can 
be compared visually with respect to changes in the com¬ 
position and volume of expenditures over the decade. 

In making comparisons of the charts for individual 
urban areas, a number of considerations should be borne 
in mind. One such consideration, of course, is the fact 
that the impact of the depression upon these areas was 
decidedly uneven, not only for the decade as a whole but 
also for any particular period within it. 

The relief patterns for many areas would undoubtedly 
be altered substantially were data available on a local-area 
basis for all programs meeting relief needs. The omission 
of programs for which data are not available for inclusion 
in the urban series (see p. 7) is particularly significant for 
the period beginning in the summer of 1935 and extending 
through the balance of the decade. During this period 
large numbers of needy persons were employed on work 
projects financed from Federal emergency relief appro¬ 
priations but operated by Federal agencies other than the 
CCC, NYA, and WPA. In some urban areas little or no 
employment was provided on such projects; in others em¬ 
ployment on these projects represented a substantial pro¬ 
portion of the total emergency employment provided on 
the basis of need. 

For certain areas the relief patterns during the brief 
period in which the Civil Works Program was in operation 


would be quite different if it were possible to exclude from 
the data for this program the earnings of nonrelief persons 
who were employed primarily for the purpose of stimulat¬ 
ing recovery by increasing purchasing power. Such per¬ 
sons represented about half the total number of persons 
employed on the program in the United States, and al¬ 
though statistics on the number of nonrelief workers are 
not available, it is known that the proportion that such 
workers comprised of the total number employed differed 
greatly from one area to another. 

As indicated on the charts, the WPA data represent 
earnings of persons employed on projects operated by the 
WPA within the area, rather than earnings of project 
workers residing within the area. It has not been un¬ 
common for large numbers of persons living in urban areas 
to cross city and county lines to work on WPA projects. 

For some urban areas for which the territory covered is 
the city, data on CWA and/or WPA earnings were avail¬ 
able only for the county (tables C-6—C-11). In con¬ 
structing the charts for these areas, such earnings were 
estimated for the city on the basis of the ratio of the city 
population to the county population, and the top of the 
expenditure curve left open to indicate this circumstance. 
In a few other instances (Baltimore, Chicago, Kansas City, 
Mo., Minneapolis, and St. Louis) reported data became 
available for the desired areas after the tabulations were 
completed; the tables were not revised, but the new figures 
were used in constructing the charts for these areas. 

In the case of the charts for a number of individual areas, 
the data on work program earnings, which cover all pay¬ 
roll periods ended during the month, do not accurately 
reflect month-to-month changes in the level of project 
operations. Pay rolls may cover weekly, biweekly, or 
semimonthly periods. When earnings are paid on a weekly 
or biweekly basis, the number of pay-roll periods ended 
within a calendar month frequently varies from one month 
to the next, with the result that monthly earnings may 
fluctuate widely while the number of persons employed 
may change only slightly or not at all. Differences in the 
number of days in calendar months also contribute to the 
erratic character of monthly changes in work program 
earnings for some individual areas. 

A brief descriptive analysis of the charts appears in the 
text, pages 30-31. 


NEW ENGLAND 


1 ' 

V 

I 

y 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 
\ 350 


300 

250 

200 

150 


/ 100 

I' 


5 

/ 

I' 

» . 

iJ 

i 


50 

0 


150 

125 

too 

75 

50 

25 

0 


1 

B 

1 

RIDGI 

EPOR 

— 

T. CO 

NN. 










1 









i 









Ip 

N ■ 

It 

% ^ 





1 

I 

1 

PI 1 

$ 

III 

mM 

m 

1 



i 




mm 






s 













N 

EW 

3RITA 

IN, C 

z 

z 

o 

r 











I 



1 


r 




i 

•Im 

iv-4 



1 

Ai 





1 

ply 

tyM ' 

• k 

§ 

y|ip 

WA«±M<‘.V 


m. 




lM 



Xv^vfvv 

^Vk;s;.^%v 



THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 
420 


360 

300 

240 

ISO 

120 

60 

0 


400 

350 

300 

250 

200 

150 

100 

50 

0 


— 

H 

ARTF 

ORD, 

— 

CONI 

4. 




1 









J 






m 



m 




S 


1 J« 

m 


i 






^ ?88?9? xS§^S3&vv^ 

m 

M 





-XvvvwwvwXv 











1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 

SPECIAL TYPES OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 


N 

EW 

MVE 

1 

CONN. 





^ • 










1 










'yyxx 





A 


S^k '' 

L 

y 

’ • 1 '■j 











m 














E 

"4'^kL 

1929 

1930 

1931 

1932 1933 

1934 

1935 

1936 1937 

1938 


PRIVATE RELIEF 


PUBLIC GENERAL RELIEF 


EARNINGS OF ALL PERSONS EMPLOYED UNDER THE CIVIL 
WORKS PROGRAM INCLUDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF 


EARNINGS ON PROJECTS OPERATED BY THE 
WPA WITHIN THE AREA 


I— INDICATES THE 10-YEAR MONTHLY AVERAGE 
t ESTIMATED ON BASIS OF RATIO OF CITY TO COUNTY POPULATION 


49 





























































































































NEW ENGLAND 


225 

200 

175 

150 

125 

100 ' 

75 

50 

25 

0 



THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 


3.500 
3,000 

2.500 

2,000 

1.500 

1,000 

500 

0 



350 

300 

250 

200 

150 

too 

50 

0 

C 

— 

AMBF 

lOGE 

, MAS 

1 

s. 















p 











1 








^0^ 

I 



2 











m 





u 

mm 

m 

1 

m 

V.V.'.'.V 

M 

VV\V^ 




1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 



PRIVATE RELIEF 


SPECIAL TYPES OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 


EARNINGS OF ALL PERSONS EMPLOYED UNDER THE CIVIL 
WORKS PROGRAM INCLUDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF 

INDICATES THE 10-YEAR MONTHLY AVERAGE 

ESTIMATED ON BASIS OF RATIO OF CITY TO COUNTY POPULATION 


PUBLIC GENERAL RELIEF 

EARNINGS ON PROJECTS OPERATED BY THE 
WPA WITHIN THE AREA 


50 































































































































NEW ENGLAND 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 
450 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 
270 


400 
350 
300 
250 
200 
I 50 
100 
50 
0 


F 

- r 

ALL 

RIVEf 

1 

kSS. 





■ 
































* 



-.i 





1 








m 

m 

i 





1 



P 






M 



WM 

is 








Si 



ir 


'.‘i ■ 

V 







240 
2 I 0 
180 

150 

120 

90 

60 

30 

0 


L 

AWRE 

NCE, 

MASl 

— 

« 















J 

1 




f 






m 





















'A 












i 

y 

p/ 


m 






i 




WZ/^ 







A <!«!".' 



q ''///// 














rjr-’ 



500 
450 
400 
350 
300 
250 
200 
15 O 
100 
50 
0 


L 

— 

OWEL 

L, M/ 

xss. 


















fv 





















m 








Isl 


m 









w 









Iw 


m 






\ 



p 




''.'Xwv? 






s 

ii 




'“’■V^58ot 










-A > 

• -CV.' 

'1" - 





1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 

SPECIAL TYPES OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 



PRIVATE RELIEF 


PUBLIC GENERAL RELIEF 


EARNINGS OF ALL PERSONS EMPLOYED UNDER THE CIVIL 
WORKS PROGRAM INCLUDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF 

INDICATES THE 10-YEAR MONTHLY AVERAGE 


EARNINGS ON PROJECTS OPERATED BY THE 
a WPA WITHIN THE AREA 


51 



































































































































































































NEW ENGLAND 




250 


200 


150 


100 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 
400 


350 


-n-^ ^ ^ r 

NEW BEDFORD, MASS. 


300 




PRIVATE RELIEF 

im 

SPECIAL TYPES OF PUBUC ASSISTANCE 



PUBLIC GENERAL 


EARNINGS OF ALL PERSONS EMPLOYED UNDER THE CIVIL 
WORKS PROGRAM INCLUDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF 


y///A EARNINGS ON PROJECTS OPERATED 
V////A W PA WITHIN THE AREA 


<«— INDICATES THE 10-YEAR MONTHLY AVERAGE 


REUEF 
BY THE 


52 




































































































































NEW ENGLAND 


THOUSANDS Of DOLLARS 





PRIVATE REUEF 

SPECIAL TYPES OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 



PUBLIC GENERAL RELIEF 


^ EARNINGS OF ALL PERSONS EMPLOYED UNDER THE CIVIL 
^ WORKS PROGRAM INCLUDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF 


EARNINGS ON PROJECTS OPERATED BY THE 


a W PA WITHIN THE AREA 


INDICATES THE 10-YEAR MONTHLY AVERAGE 
t ESTIMATED ON BASIS OF RATIO OF CITY TO COUNTY POPULATION 





















































































MIDDLE ATLANTIC 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 
1,400 


1,120 


840 


560 


280 


N 

1 

EWAP 

K, N. 

J. 

1 



J 





11 

1 









Mm 

m 

1 







'///// 


















THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 


28,000 


21,000 


14,000 


7,000 


0 





400 

320 

240 

160 

80 

0 

250 

200 

150 

100 

50 


0 

1929 


1930 1931 1932 


1933 


1934 


1935 


I93'6 


1937 


1938 


N 

lAGAI 

1 ! 

RA FALLS, 

1 

]-1-: 

N.Y. 1 







i 

1 

1 

ii 

y 

1 

< t 

— 




JL 


1 

f 


. i 


> 

H 

1 


^ ' 
m 





1 

M 

S 

1 


PRIVATE RELIEF 




SPECIAL TYPES OF PUBUC ASSISTANCE 


PUBLIC GENERAL RELIEF 


EARNINGS OF ALL PERSONS EMPLOYED UNDER THE CIVIL 
WORKS PROGRAM INCLUDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF 

INDICATES THE 10-YEAR MONTHLY AVERAGE 

ESTIMATED ON BASIS OF RATIO OF CITY TO COUNTY POPULATION 


EARNINGS ON PROJECTS OPERATED BY THE 
21 W PA WITHIN THE AREA 


54 










































































































































































3,500 

3,000 

2,500 

2,000 

1,500 

1,000 

500 

0 

1,000 

800 

600 

400 

200 

0 

800 

700 

600 

500 

400 

300 

200 

100 

0 


MIDDLE ATLANTIC 


NDS OF DOLLARS 


B 

UFFAl 

-0,N. 

Y. 

























A 








1 

1 



m 



>*— 










1 




















s 



THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 
200 


F 

OCHE 

^- 

:STER, N.Y 

1 


1 






m 1 


p 


g 






W' 




















s 

YRACUSE, 

N.Y. 

1 

' 


1 


1 






■ 

s 









-1 

i 

\ 

4 













m 

1 








^ 1 



% 

w 





V*‘<' 

w'; 1 

4 v:xv«? 

\ 

N A'/iCfy 




1 








m 



w 
















B 


929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 



400 


350 


300 


250 


200 


I 5 0 


100 


50 


— 

A 

LBAN 

Y, N.Y 

r 













V 

N 

1 











1 










1 










1 

1 J 


. 

/ 

' 

1. 

to 


J 





1 ^ 

1 1 




y 


V/ 

i 

1 






1 




w 


W/ 











m 

s 


1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934' 1935 1936 1937 1938 


PRIVATE RELIEF 


SPECIAL TYPES OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 


PUBUC GENERAL RELIEF 


EARNINGS OF ALL PERSONS EMPLOYED UNDER THE CIVIL 
WORKS PROGRAM INCLUDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF 

INDICATES THE 10-YEAR MONTHLY AVERAGE 

ESTIMATED ON BASIS OF RATIO OF CITY TO COUNTY POPULATION 


EARNINGS ON PROJECTS OPERATED BY THE 


W PA WITHIN THE AREA 


55 
















































































































































































MIDDLE ATLANTIC 



THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 
300 

250 

200 

150 

100 

50 

O 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 






PRIVATE RELIEF 


iiP 


SPECIAL TYPES OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 


PUBLIC GENERAL RELIEF 


EARNINGS OF ALL PERSONS EMPLOYED UNDER THE CIVIL 
WORKS PROGRAM INCLUDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF 

INDICATES THE 10-YEAR MONTHLY AVERAGE 

ESTIMATED ON BASIS OF RATIO OF CITY TO COUNTY POPULATION 


EARNINGS ON PROJECTS OPERATED BY THE 
WPA WITHIN THE AREA 


56 





















































































































































MIDDLE ATLANTIC 



I 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 
6,000 


I 

5,000 
^ 4,000 


3,000 

2,000 

1,000 


p 

HILAC 

^ELP^ 

HA, PI 
















Wa 







MW 

Ww;- 

y////. 








lAniil 


Mm. 

mm 








m 


^:v 

vX-v^'X'l 











600 

540 

480 

420 

360 

300 

240 

180 

120 

60 

0 


C 

HESTI 

iR,P/l 

.. 




































J/l 







LI 

IP 


w 










p 







fei 

1* 

i 

i 










i 






mmiM 


















■■■aa.MMMA 









.‘Xv;-:- 









h Y^ 

' ■ ' i 


1929 

1930 

1931 

1932 1933 

1934 1935 

1936 

1937 

1938 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 
5,000 


4,000 


3,000 


2,000 


1,000 


560 


480 


400 


320 


240 


160 


80 


P 

ITTSE 

UR6h 

,PA. 











Y 

i 


r 

m 









0 













!§3wass 




E 

RIE, R 

L 















m 


m 







A 

1 

— 

m 






^ P 

i ^ 



W'a 






1 

^ P 


yy 


m 






\ 












'>• 


MvSeS 


PRIVATE RELIEF 


1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 
SPECIAL types of PUBUC ASSISTANCE ^ 


PUBUC GENERAL RELIEF 


EARNINGS OF ALL PERSONS EMPLOYED UNDER THE CIVIL 
WORKS PROGRAM INCLUDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF 

INDICATES THE 10'YEAR MONTHLY AVERAGE 


EARNINGS ON PROJECTS OPERATED BY THE 


2J W PA WITHIN THE AREA 


57 




































































































































MIDDLE ATLANTIC 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 



THOUSANDS OF OOLllARS 
2,100 


1,800 

1,500 

1,200 

900 

600 

300 


w 

ILKES 

-BAR 

— 

RE, P 

A. 













1 












w, 




i 

i 1 

1 f 

r 

w 

w 

m 





I 

M 

p 

w 

m-, 

m 






i 


y//// 


m 






iilKi 



Issssssb 










1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 


PRIVATE RELIEF 


SPECIAL TYPES OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 


PUBLIC GENERAL RELIEF 


EARNINGS OF ALL PERSONS EMPLOYED UNDER THE CIVIL 
WORKS PROGRAM INCLUDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF 


EARNINGS ON PROJECTS OPERATED BY THE 


21 W PA WITHIN THE AREA 


INDICATES THE 10-YEAR MONTHLY AVERAGE 


58 






























































































































































NORTH CENTRAL 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 
14,000 


12.000 




450 

400 

350 

300 

250 

200 

150 

too 

50 

0 


E 

VANS> 

/ILLE, 

IND. 

















i 

I 










i 







y 

4a 











////y/ 








V ty 

V 

'M 

/y/ 

fwm 

V'^/y'/y/y/A 







p 








^ 1 

s 

w 

IE 

lii 

El 




1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 


400 

350 

300 

250 

200 

I 50 

I 00 

50 


F 

ORT 

WAYNI 

i. INC 

. 











\ 




k 





: 





p 










B 






y 

1 r 

yA 



- 







% 

m 

1 






K 


m 

m. 

M 

m 

m 












1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 


PRIVATE RELIEF 


SPECIAL TYPES OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 


PU8UC GENERAL RELIEF 


EARNINGS OF ALL PERSONS EMPLOYED UNDER THE CIVIL 
WORKS PROGRAM INCLUDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF 

INDICATES THE 10-YEAR MONTHLY AVERAGE 


EARNINGS ON PROJECTS OPERATED BY THE 
WPA WITHIN THE AREA 


452436°—42 


59 




































































































































































NORTH CENTRAL 



THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 
1,400 


1,200 


INDIANAPOLIS, INO. 


1,000 


800 


600 


400 


200 


300 
250 
200 
I 50 
100 
50 
O 



THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 
450 


400 


350 



700 


600 


500 


400 


300 


200 


I 00 


Of 

iS MC 

(/> 

UJ 

z 

1 

low/ 

V 




















! 

§ 









i 

1 




P 

P 





■ 








mlM 


1 

'j 







)■ 

; 


1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 

PRIVATE RELIEF pjjv.'| SPECIAL TYPES OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 


1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 

PUBLIC GENERAL RELIEF 


EARNINGS OF ALL PERSONS EMPLOYED UNDER THE CIVIL 
WORKS PROGRAM INCLUDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF 


EARNINGS ON PROJECTS OPERATED BY THE 
WPA WITHIN THE AREA 


INDICATES THE 10-YEAR MONTHLY AVERAGE 


60 
























































































































































NORTH CENTRAL 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 
330 


300 

270 

240 

210 


‘ 180 

'f 

/ 150 


120 

90 

60 

30 


[f3i 


1 

Sli 

1 

DUX C 

1 

;iTY, 

OWA 





































I 










1 

i 

1 








1 ^ 


p 







1 


A ’/ 

yy// 

m 

1 






I 


i 

'w 







1 

vX///// 









'M 











THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 
400 


350 

300 

250 

200 

I 50 

100 

50 

0 

320 

280 

240 

200 

160 

120 

80 

40 


1 1 

KANSAS 

CITY 

, KA^ 

S. 




1 









1 























?! ’ 

'<W/ 


■ 

1 




' V 


■ 






1 

p 

yy 










1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 

PRIVATE RELIEF SPECIAL TYPES OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 


1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 

PUBLIC GENERAL RELIEF 


EARNINGS OF ALL PERSONS EMPLOYED UNDER THE CIVIL 
WORKS PROGRAM INCLUDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF 

INDICATES THE 10-YEAR MONTHLY AVERAGE 


EARNINGS ON PROJECTS OPERATED BY THE 
WPA WITHIN THE AREA 


61 
























































































































































NORTH CENTRAL 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 
960 

900 

840 

780 

720 

660 

600 

540 

480 

420 

360 

300 

240 

I 80 

120 

60 

® 1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 






PRIVATE RELIEF 


SPECIAL TYPES OF PUBUC ASSISTANCE 


EARNINGS OF ALL PERSONS EMPLOYED UNDER THE CIVIL 
WORKS PROGRAM INCLUDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF 


PUBUC GENERAL RELIEF 

EARNINGS ON PROJECTS OPERATED BY THE 
21 W PA WITHIN THE AREA 


INDICATES THE 10-YEAR MONTHLY AVERAGE 


62 





















































































































































































NORTH CENTRAL 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 
720 


660 

600 

540 

480 

420 

360 

300 

240 

180 

120 

60 

0 

900 

800 

700 

600 

500 

400 

300 

200 

100 

0 


1 

PC 

1 

)NTIA( 

MIC 

H. 






a 










1 







_ 



1 





1 


i 



i 










B 





1 










i 

i 









1 

k \ 

1 









1 

lil J 



i 





P 

3&x->y.« 

J.v.y^V 


y\ 




1 

A K 



m 













0 

— 

JLUTh 

1. MIN 

— 

N. 



























P 






\ 














/ ////// 


1 





; 

; 

>-fi 

fc 

s\ k 

'S k 

X h 

M 










§ L 

!<v 

w 

P 


1 




'a Km''-?? 


vX'.' 







A 






;' '■ '-■' 




i 

•y.« 

\v.*. 









F* 

vI*X 













1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 
■m PRIVATE RELIEF SPECIAL TYPES OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 



PUBUC GENERAL RELIEF 


EARNINGS OF ALL PERSONS EMPLOYED UNDER THE CIVIL 
WORKS PROGRAM INCLUDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF 

INDICATES THE 10-YEAR MONTHLY AVERAGE 


EARNINGS ON PROJECTS OPERATED BY THE 
WPA WITHIN THE AREA 


63 

































































































































































































NORTH CENTRAL 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 
1.200 

1,000 

800 

600 

400 

200 

0 

1,100 
1,000 
900 
800 
70 0 
600 
500 
400 
300 
200 
100 
0 

1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 




2,800 

2,400 

2,000 

1,600 

1,200 

800 

400 

0 



THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 
3,200 



1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 



PRIVATE RELIEF 


’ ] SPECIAL TYPES OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 



PUBLIC GENERAL 


EARNINGS OF ALL PERSONS EMPLOYED UNDER THE CIVIL 
WORKS PROGRAM INCLUDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF 


W///\ EARNINGS ON PROJECTS OPERATED 
V^//A WPA WITHIN THE AREA 


RELIEF 
BY THE 


<— INDICATES THE 10-YEAR MONTHLY AVERAGE 


64 












































































































































































NORTH CENTRAL 



600 


400 


200 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 
1,600 


1,400 


AKRON, OHIO 


1,200 


1,000 


800 




800 


600 


400 


200 


0 

720 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 
1,200 


COLUMBUS, OHIO 


1,000 


660 

600 

540 

480 

420 

360 

300 

240 

180 

120 

60 

0 



1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 


PRIVATE RELIEF 


/' SPECIAL TYPES OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 


PUBLIC GENERAL RELIEF 


EARNINGS OF ALL PERSONS EMPLOYED UNDER THE CIVIL 
WORKS PROGRAM INCLUDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF 

INDICATES THE 10'YEAR MONTHLY AVERAGE 


EARNINGS ON PROJECTS OPERATED BY THE 


21 W PA WITHIN THE AREA 


65 





































































































































































NORTH 


CENTRAL 




THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 
1,800 


4,800 


1,600 


4,2 00 


1,400 


3,600 
3,000 
2,4 00 
1,800 
1,200 


1,200 

1,000 

8 00 

600 


600 


400 


200 


0 

900 

800 

7 00 

600 

500 

400 


300 


2 00 


I 00 


1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 


0 

1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 
6,000 


5,400 


300 

270 

240 

2 I 0 

180 

150 

120 


SPRINGFIELD. OHIO 


PRIVATE RELIEF 


SPECIAL TYPES OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 


PUBLIC GENERAL RELIEF 


EARNINGS OF ALL PERSONS EMPLOYED UNDER THE CIVIL 
WORKS PROGRAM INCLUDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF 


EARNINGS ON PROJECTS OPERATED BY THE 
WPA WITHIN THE AREA 


INDICATES THE 10-YEAR MONTHLY AVERAGE 


66 


































































































































































NORTH 


CENTRAL 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 
1,000 

900 

800 

700 

600 

500 

400 

300 

200 

100 

0 

3.500 

3,000 

2.500 

2,000 

1.500 

1,000 

500 

° 1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 




THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 



PRIVATE RELIEF 



SPECIAL TYPES OF PUBLIC 


ASSISTANCE 



PUBLIC GENERAL 


RELIEF 


EARNINGS OF ALL PERSONS EMPLOYED UNDER THE CIVIL 
WORKS PROGRAM INCLUDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF 


Y7Z7A EARNINGS ON PROJECTS OPERATED BY THE 
/////A WPA WITHIN THE AREA 


INDICATES THE lO-YEAR MONTHLY AVERAGE 


67 






















































































































































NORTH CENTRAL 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 
400 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 



1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 

PRIVATE RELIEF 


350 


300 


250 


200 


I 50 


100 


50 


! R 

ACIN 

E, Wl 

S. 

















! 





'1 




1 










j 





i 

I 1 













A 


i 







m 


W 










K 


SPECIAL TYPES OF PUBUC ASSISTANCE 


1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 

PUBLIC GENERAL RELIEF 


^ EARNINGS OF ALL PERSONS EMPLOYED UNDER THE CIVIL 
WORKS PROGRAM INCLUDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF 


EARNINGS ON PROJECTS OPERATED BY THE 
WPA WITHIN THE AREA 


INDICATES THE 10-YEAR MONTHLY AVERAGE 


68 























































































SOUTH ATLANTIC AND SOUTH CENTRAL 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 



900 

800 

700 

600 

500 

400 

300 

200 

I 00 

0 


n 

B 

RMIN 

6HAM 

.ALA 


1 









1 









i 



P 






l-i 











1 

1 





w 






: 

V, 


!■ 

m 

f 






WT*'*' 

' S 

V hy,\ 

1^? 

1 


1 

1 





mI 

•Kv:':-: 

'■:'^yyy.y 

m 


1 




m 







1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 
PRIVATE RELIEF 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 
275 


250 

225 

200 

175 

150 

I 25 

I 00 

75 

50 

25 


M 

DBILE 

, ALA 

































1, 




















ll. 




M 





i 

11 



L 

m 







1 

1 

II 

y//// 









1 



_ - 





1 

I 




1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 
SPECIAL TYPES OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 


PUBUC GENERAL REUEF 


^ EARNINGS OF ALL PERSONS EMPLOYED UNDER THE CIVIL 
WORKS PROGRAM INCLUDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF 


EARNINGS ON PROJECTS OPERATED BY THE 


id W PA WITHIN THE AREA 


INDICATES THE 10-YEAR MONTHLY AVERAGE 


69 








































































































































SOUTH ATLANTIC AND SOUTH CENTRAL 




THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 

2,400 


2,100 


BALTIMORE. MD. 


1,800 


1,500 


1,200 


900 


1,200 


1,000 


300 


800 


250 


200 

I 50 

I 00 


200 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 
1,600 


1,400 


WASHINGTON, D.C. 


600 

300 

0 


350 


600 


400 


1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 


1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 


PRIVATE RELIEF 


SPECIAL TYPES OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 


EARNINGS OF ALL PERSONS EMPLOYED UNDER THE CIVIL 
WORKS PROGRAM INCLUDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF 


PUBLIC GENERAL RELIEF 
EARNINGS ON PROJECTS OPERATED BY THE 


21 WPA WITHIN THE AREA 


INDICATES THE 10-YEAR MONTHLY AVERAGE 


70 











































































































SOUTH ATLANTIC AND SOUTH CENTRAL 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 
360 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 



340 
320 
300 
280 
260 
240 
220 
200 
I 80 
I 60 
I 40 
I 20 
100 
80 
60 
40 
20 
0 


1 

Ml 

AMI. 

FLA. 


















































































JN 










K 

















1 











I 











i 






1 i 




m 








m 


W/A 








m 

m 









1 










A 



Pggllj SPECIAL TYPES OF PUBUC ASSISTANCE 

[MPLOYED UN 
THE ADMINIS 

INDICATES THE 10-YEAR MONTHLY AVERAGE 


PRIVATE RELIEF 

EARNINGS OF ALL PERSONS EMPLOYED UNDER THE CIVIL 
WORKS PROGRAM INCLUDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF 


1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 

PUBUC GENERAL RELIEF 


vtttttx earnings on projects operated by the 

y////A W PA WITHIN THE AREA 


71 










































































































SOUTH ATLANTIC AND SOUTH CENTRAL 



THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 
220 


170 



160 


I 50 


140 


130 


120 


I I 0 


100 


90 


80 


70 


60 


50 


40 


30 


20 


I 0 



PRIVATE RELIEF 


f V I SPECIAL TYPES OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 


1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 

PUBLIC GENERAL RELIEF 


3 EARNINGS OF ALL PERSONS EMPLOYED UNDER THE CIVIL 
WORKS PROGRAM INCLUDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF 


EARNINGS ON PROJECTS OPERATED BY THE 
WPA WITHIN THE AREA 


INDICATES THE 10-YEAR MONTHLY AVERAGE 


72 




















































































































































































































SOUTH ATLANTIC AND SOUTH CENTRAL 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 




PRIVATE RELIEF 


1 


SPECIAL TYPES OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 


PUBLIC GENERAL RELIEF 


EARNINGS OF ALL PERSONS EMPLOYED UNDER THE CIVIL 
WORKS PROGRAM INCLUDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF 


EARNINGS ON PROJECTS OPERATED BY THE 
WPA WITHIN THE AREA 


INDICATES THE 10-YEAR MONTHLY AVERAGE 


73 














































































































240 

220 

200 

180 

t 60 

140 

120 

100 

eo 

€0 

40 

20 

0 


SOUTH ATLANTIC AND SOUTH CENTRAL 


IDS OF DOLLARS 


61 

^EENS 

>BORC 

,N.C. 





























































f 

A 









! 

1 


yA I 










1J 

m 

yy.-y 

m 





r 





Ai 

iiii. 

wMm 


■7 

\ V 

M 

w 







V, 

P 






K 

m 



Ww .V- 



1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 
I 60 


I 40 


20 


I 00 


80 


60 


40 


20 


W 

INSTC 

N-SA 

.EM. 1 

^.C. 

























f 


















1. 


p 






1 

L 


1 

* /yyj^ 

p 

P 








¥.X-X' 7 

fcf 

y///A 

P 

P 





s 


ill 





1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 


PRIVATE RELIEF 


SPECIAL TYPES OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 


PUBLIC GENERAL RELIEE 


EARNINGS OF ALL PERSONS EMPLOYED UNDER THE CIVIL 
WORKS PROGRAM INCLUDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF 


EARNINGS ON PROJECTS OPERATED 
WPA WITHIN THE AREA 


INDICATES THE 10-YEAR MONTHLY AVERAGE 








































































SOUTH ATLANTIC AND SOUTH CENTRAL 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 



THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 



m PRIVATE RELIEF jljjl SPECIAL TYPES OF PUBLIC 

EARNINGS OF ALL PERSONS EMPLOYED UNDER THE CIVIL 
WORKS PROGRAM INCLUDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF 


ASSISTANCE 



PUBUC GENERAL REUEF 


Y////A EARNINGS ON PROJECTS OPERATED BY THE 
V///A WPA WITHIN THE AREA 


INDICATES THE 10-YEAR MONTHLY AVERAGE 


452436°—42 




75 
































































































380 

360 

340 

320 

300 

280 

260 

240 

220 

200 

180 

160 

140 

120 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 

0 


SOUTH ATLANTIC AND SOUTH CENTRAL 


\IDS OF DOLLARS 


1 

Kt 

1 

JOXVI 

— 

LLE, 

— 

TENN 

















































■ 


s 

\ 

V 

y 










s 

y 









V 

\ 

s 
























( 








j 


1 








p 


J 




















r 






ii 

ii 

• 

y 


W. 






1 

yJ^'.V.'C 



^///// 

0. 







* 

s 

m 

m 


























1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 



PRIVATE RELIEF 




SPECIAL TYPES 


OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 



PUBLIC GENERAL 


RELIEF 



EARNINGS OF ALL PERSONS EMPLOYED UNDER THE CIVIL 
WORKS PROGRAM INCLUDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF 


^/7A EARNINGS ON PROJECTS OPERATED BY THE 
V////A WPA WITHIN THE AREA 


INDICATES THE 10-YEAR MONTHLY AVERAGE 

































































































SOUTH ATLANTIC AND SOUTH CENTRAL 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 
400 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 
650 


6 00 

550 

500 

450 

400 

350 

300 

250 

2 00 

I 50 

100 

50 

0 


Di 

\LLAS 

i, TE! 

<. 











, 










I 










\ 

1 




















' 

■< 


i 


i 

1 




i! 





/i 

j 




i; 





m 

! 







A if/ 

m 

i 





IaI 

V j ff 

ili 



P 

P 






p 




iiiivSoSi 







mi 

m 


-H U,i 

4 

J ,'r^i 





a 







380 


360 


340 


320 


300 


280 


260 


240 


220 


200 


I 80 


160 


I 40 


I 20 


I 00 


80 


60 


40 


20 


1 

EL 

PASI 

-1 

m 

K. 































j 








































1 




















1 










1 

1 










1 

\ 



















i 



A 







1 










V 

\\ 


/y 


1 





I I 

1 

IP 

W[ 

;pl 


J 





I i 

V//)^ 

P 






B 



w 

1 



r 

C1 


SV.VW’^ 





1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 


PRIVATE RELIEF 


SPECIAL TYPES OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 


1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 

PUBLIC GENERAL RELIEF 


EARNINGS OF ALL PERSONS EMPLOYED UNDER THE CIVIL 
WORKS PROGRAM INCLUDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF 


EARNINGS ON PROJECTS OPERATED BY THE 
WPA WITHIN THE AREA 


INDICATES THE 10-YEAR MONTHLY AVERAGE 



































































































































450 

400 

350 

300 

250 

200 

I 50 

I 00 

50 

0 

600 

550 

500 

450 

400 

350 

300 

250 

200 

150 

100 

50 

0 

78 


SOUTH ATLANTIC AND SOUTH CENTRAL 


OF DOLLARS 


FC 

)RT W 

ORTH 

.TEX 
















-4 








1 


J 








1 

^-r-1 


p 







s 


m 


1 





: 

y 

^ r 

y .; 

1 / 

1 ' 

li 









yy.\ / 


if 

P 





.1 o 




•j • " 

P 
























LwyyA<- 






H 

OUST 

ON. T 

EX. 

, 




















J 































1 






1 











i 








m . 







4 




P 









i 

m 

p 









Rli 










wm 



1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 




PRIVATE RELIEF pIpH SPECIAL TYPES OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 



PUBUC GENERAL REUEF 


EARNINGS OF ALL PERSONS EMPLOYED UNDER THE CIVIL 
WORKS PROGRAM INCLUDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF 


W/TA EARNINGS ON PROJECTS OPERATED BY THE 
V/Z//A W PA WITHIN THE AREA 


INDICATES THE 10-YEAR MONTHLY AVERAGE 



















































































































































SOUTH ATLANTIC AND SOUTH CENTRAL 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 
240 


220 


200 


i 80 


160 


I 40 


120 


100 


60 


60 


40 


20 


N( 

)RFOl 

.K, VA 

































































A 













I 


I 



i 







Pi :</ 

r" 

“•Xv 

SV ' 

yy^/ 


f 

<— 





^ li 

Nf-- 

m 

m 

m 

m 

I 





1 ; 

im 



w 

w 








w% 

w 




1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 
280 


260 
240 
220 
200 
I 80 
I 60 
I 40 
I 20 
I 00 
80 
60 
40 
20 
0 


I 

Rl 

-[ 

CHMO 

— 1 

NO.Y 

A. 












S 

\ 

\ 


1 






j 


; 




















V 

V 



i 






1 


s 

s 

s 

i 


1 



1 










J 

! 







m!; 

H 

M 


1 




1 

J 


ll 

m 






1 i 

m 


W 

W. 


i 



1 

u 

m 


W 



! 



iJ 



V 

m 

Wi 




iJ 

H 

s 

■ 

MM 

m 

M 


aBB 


■.-s 


1 

m 


1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 


PRIVATE RELIEF 


pggij SPECIAL TYPES OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 


PUBUC GENERAL RELIEF 


EARNINGS OF ALL PERSONS EMPLOYED UNDER THE CIVIL 
WORKS PROGRAM INCLUDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF 


EARNINGS ON PROJECTS OPERATED BY THE 


a W PA WITHIN THE AREA 


INDICATES THE 10-YEAR MONTHLY AVERAGE 


79 



























































































SOUTH ATLANTIC AND SOUTH CENTRAL 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 
96 


86 

80 

72 

64 

56 

48 

40 

32 

24 

16 

8 

0 


F 

lOANO 

UJ 

^_ 

1 

^A. 

































1 





i 


\ 








1 

1 









1 

ll 

L 








^ 11 


1 







fjl 

IB 

|j 




1 



wi 

IB 

m 

m 





mi 

B| 

R 

m 




hd 



r*i*sc 

mm 




1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 

liQB PRIVATE RELIEF 


330 

300 
270 
240 
2 I 0 
180 

150 

120 

90 

60 

30 

0 



HI 

z 

H 

Z 

3T0N, 

W. V/ 

L 



































i 


















Bir 

T r. 

m 





. s 

1 c >. 

^ J 

^ A 




m 





p L' 

^ r 

a 

1 

m 

Wy 

P 





yy W B s 

R'' 


P 

R77^ 








V/y// 

"W/ 












1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 

SPECIAL TYPES OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 


EARNINGS OF ALL PERSONS EMPLOYED UNDER THE CIVIL 
WORKS PROGRAM INCLUDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF 

INDICATES THE 10-YEAR MONTHLY AVERAGE 


PUBLIC GENERAL RELIEF 

EARNINGS ON PROJECTS OPERATED BY THE 
WPA WITHIN THE AREA 


80 


































































































































MOUNTAIN AND PACIFIC 


THOUSANDS OF DOUARS 
7,000 


6,000 

5,000 

4,000 

3,000 

2,000 

1,000 

0 


LI 

)S AM 

GELE 

S, CA 

LIF. 










, 


/A< K 


A 








W/, 


p 









H 

m 
























800 
700 
600 
500 
400 
300 
200 
I 00 
0 


— 

S) 

— 

Oli 

iGO, ( 

JALIF. 












i 









B 

w 









m 







1 


W/ 






: 

I 





















1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 


■Uh 

PRIVATE RELIEF 

1 SPECIAL TYPES OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE | 



PUBUC GENERAL 


RELIEF 


EARNINGS OF ALL PERSONS EMPLOYED UNDER THE CIVIL 
WORKS PROGRAM INCLUDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF 


Y////A EARNINGS ON PROJECTS OPERATED BY THE 
/////\ W PA WITHIN THE AREA 


■ 4 — INDICATES THE 10-YEAR MONTHLY AVERAGE 


81 































































































































MOUNTAIN AND PACIFIC 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 
2,1 00 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 
900 


?,800 

1,500 

1,200 

900 

600 

300 

0 


s< 

* 

FF 

ANCI 

• 

o 

u 

m 

CALIF 





J 










w 








m 

m 

1 







1 

m. 

■ 







I 

y//// 

w 







iC" 

V,' 



800 

700 

600 

500 

400 

300 

200 

100 

0 


—1 

0 

1-1 

lENVE 

:r,ci 

1 

)L0. 





i 





1 





k 





1 







i 

i 



1 





W/, 






H 

B 

m 


Wi 

- 




■ 

B 


w 

m 





M 







j 

a, 




» 






9 

n.W, 

l-f^y 


ii 



PRIVATE RELIEF 



SPECIAL TYPES OF PUBUC ASSISTANCE 



PUBLIC GENERAL 


RELIEF 


EARNINGS OF ALL PERSONS EMPLOYED UNDER THE CIVIL 
S WORKS PROGRAM INCLUDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF 


yy/TA EARNINGS ON PROJECTS OPERATED BY THE 
V/2Z/A WPA WITHIN THE AREA 


• 4 — INDICATES THE 10-YEAR MONTHLY AVERAGE 


82 



































































































































































MOUNTAIN AND PACIFIC 


THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 



THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS 
1,400 


1,200 

1,000 

800 

600 

400 

200 


'I 

1 

EATTl 

UJ 

ISH. 

















( 









m 

m 








A i/. 

^///// 

///// 

w 





i ^ 

y 


i 











4929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 


mig PRIVATE REUEF 




SPECIAL TYPES OF PUBUC ASSISTANCE 



EARNINGS OF ALL PERSONS EMPLOYED UNDER THE CIVIL 
WORKS PROGRAM INCLUDING THE ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF 



PUBLIC GENERAL 


REUEF 


EARNINGS ON PROJECTS OPERATED BY THE 
WPA WITHIN THE AREA 


INDICATES THE lO-YEAR MONTHLY AVERAGE 


83 


































































00 

Os 


0 


§ 

0 

St 

0 

nO 




•s 

Vi 


o 

0 

k. 

Q, 

K 

0 

s 

0 

s 


<Dm 

•f" p 
r1 
Oh«P 


c« 

00 

oT 




lN.cO^«^f<^CO'^00«D’-*C^O> 

<O^»O':O*-i'^h,h-CO*OC0’^ 

OiO'—'C^cs«o>oo>ooco*^i^ 

Gin^ooofcc t^cS' i-T^o 
O’^'^o>c4c‘»*^’-^r^?or>* 

OOOSCOCOOOCOOOCOOiC^ 


0 

fA 

r- 

CM 

05 

CO 

CM 

3 

CM 

CO 

CO 

•4f4 

-1^ 

ccT 

m 

0 

0 “ 

rX 

CO* 


CO 

as 

00 

CM 

00 



^4 

aH 


05 ^ ^ ^ 05 

CO »o o <o *0 ;o 


*-H o »-• W CO 


^ ^ ^ ^ ^ »-H ^ ^ ^ i-H ^ 


»o 


wo 

*o 


C000»005»c0’^c^c^«0*0c0 

t^r'-ooO'-H05t^c^ooooeot>. 

C^OOCO-^^OOOJOiOCS-^^ 

c*S'fO^'^a6'^^oo<oai'^co 

05COt^'^COO»OI'-C^*-<‘OiO 

0 c 0 c 000 '^ 00 ’^c 0 » 00 '^’^ 


OICCO'^COC^C^CMC^CO '^00 


CO 

CO 

co" 

o 

05 


s 


iot^QO'-^'^r>»050500r^o 
r^c0'-c<g-^«?^004coi-^t^ 


■^00 t>* 


M ^ t- 1-H 


^^'^’^050C<'^t'-05^<D 
O5»-<C^'^00«DiO'^COt>-CO»-« 
OO'od'od »0 co’co CO eo CO of C»5’'^ 




cor'-oo50<4oots.cMco»ocMr'p 

50 

^0050C4CMTfF-ct'.05CO»0 

<4 

P 


<D<D5O^C0»O’^r^O5O5O5a5 

-144 

50»Of-4500000»OhpO05CM»O 


X 

0 

lN.CM000»04O5O50C005t>-G0 


qi6^fHi-h00505i—'C0»000 

CO 


oT 

cd“ ^* 50* io^co* 00 05* 0 ^ 1 - 4 “ '^* tC f-T 

50* 

cTCM*■njJ'cD tXAH"CM*”^* CO*00 *oTcm* 

HJ4“ 

0 P 

50 

CM CM CM CM'CM CM CM ?4 CO CO CO 

CO 

505050*0»0c0c0c0c0c0c0t>- 

sr5 

•4^ •pH 

50 

fHpHpH*^i—4fHi-Hi-H»-HfH»^pH 

05 

^ aH fM rH f—( ^ rH ^ aH pH fH 

CM 

TJ-O 



•k 


CM* 

<5 







X! 




Q 

k. 


":3 

c 


3 



Ph 


<J 

c 

h. 


Q 

o 

e 

0 

o 

Q 

;i 

0 

<w 

Vi 

*m 

Vi 

Vi 

0 

o 

•M 

>k 

0, 

c 

o 

*m 

«c 

s 

t 

s 

o 

s 

I 


2 

f2 


CO 

*0 

p 

p 


X) 

p 

Pm 


o 

o 

p 

CC 

•«^ 

to 

CO 

CO 

03 

o 

x: 

p 

Q. 


CO 

0/ 

p. 

>. 


03 

»p>^ 

c 

a 

GQ 


4? 

b< 

'cS 

u 

O) 

p 

0) 

o 


COiO^cOi-H.-iiO’Tt'CO^CO'C* 

cocooOi-Hr^'^ooooi^ooco 

CDCOt^05t^C00505CSJC00500 

cd‘^^o•-^c<^^o^X‘a^oc^"coTM" 

t^I^00O0C0COG000O5O>O5O5 


CC 

r- 

cs" 

»o 

c<r 


C0»-H00b»0005'^>0»0c^c0-^ 
ojr^Q^ooiooc^t^'—'COO 
0 -hOCO»OI^C^’^OCOOcC 

tX oT c^’ co" oTo C<r »o fX oTo^ 

OOOOOO*-''-''^’-^*^^ 

»-h»-hc<|CSIC^C^CMC^OIC^C^C^ 


o a 
o « S 

-p p'p 

0«43 
^ «'o 
PJ 


o 

CO 

o 

«« 

t>. 

«e^ 


CO^Ot>»OC^f-'C^^C^T}<>-j 

0 ' 00 '-Hooooc<iTfr-.»ot^ 

orc^*-He4'o4'^GriX'or 
co'^cor'-ot—i^oot^ 

^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ 


00 

wH 

•« 

o 


o 


oooor-^^cct>-co 
oco-^ooocCTpt^r>. 
O CO<N O OC^ 


Tf h- 

. CO <C 

00 O CJ o 


o»or*'cooococococo’^h-.o 
COCSCD‘OCCCOOOGO*-'CO'^«—' 
kO>OtOu04O5O>OU^CCcCCCt^ 


o 

o 

o 

co” 

o 


?? 


OC^lCOUOCDOCOiOl^t^OC^ 
»OCO^Oi—*»-<C4COOC^COO 
cO'^cooococor^cccoc^cot-' 

iOCO'^CDr^OiO»OOOQ^lN 
^'^'00 00 00 00 OOOOO 1 -‘ 


c^ c^ 


00 


CO 

<N 


uo 


Ccwoeot^-^UO^OCOCDCOCO 

OO^’^CO'^cOoOC^cCOOOOO 

ccc^ic^cot'-t^c^oooort 

S ^^CO Co"»C co'o t^OO^O CO*CC 

cor>-»o*-«oo-^-^*oio»-H'<i^ 

^,^,-Hr-l.-HOOOOO^*^ 


C^C^IC^C^C^C^C^C^C^C^C^C^ 


45 
<X> V 
bc P 
^ cs 
JL 

'P CO 

O CO 
^ CO 

o3 


o 

o 

o 

00 * 


00 50 OS 05 
C4C^C^C^C^CSC4c0<©*-'f^cD 

C^ C^ CO 50 
^ 

1-4 Ol 


05 

CO 

CO 

05 

s 


^1-MCOi—'C^iOOSCOCOC^'^OS 
^■^•^00CO*-'C5'i^'COi—<50CO 
«-^COOOOO'^OCDOCOC5 '-hO< 


50 Ol 
CO 50 


-Hi-H^co-^COWOOO 

t>-oooooooo-^^ 


50 

05 

t'- 

«k 

00 

50 

04 


000'^OCOC450 50 00t'»t^cp 
W^(aco04r--CDC00500050 
1 —tOC050*“iC400'^''ft—C405 

to',-rCO*-5# C4*C<r’^*00* 
C0<Mh-TfC0t^05CMeD-H5OC4 
50COC0t>«00G0000505OOi-H 


00 

50 

CO 

•> 

CO 

r>. 


50 


-4t>.COf-HCOQOOCOC^t>.i-HCO 
COC00500«005i—'-^05000 
t>.i-HO5*-'O500^COi—ICOCOO 

CD i^50‘TM*Dfccrco t>r 

OOCO»Ot>-050C^'»J*-TH»OcD 
1-ID4C4C4D404COCOCOCOCOCO 


5 

o 


0 



05 

0 

05 

CO 

05 

05 

CO 


00 

CM 

CM 


0 

:2; 

CO 


00 

05 

pH 

05 



pH 

05 

50 

50 


pH 

0 

CM 

CO 


pH 

00 


CM 

CM 

0 

CO 


50 

00 

-*1' 

Q 

0 

CO 

50 

!>• 

CO 


50 


CO 


50 

0 


CO 

h- 

CM 


00 

CO 

CO 

CO 

0 


CM 


05 

05 

1-H 

05 


05 

CO 

0 

pH 

05 

4^ 

pH 

CO 

05 

0 

05 

00 

CM 


05 


00 

CM 

CO 

»o 

pH 

0 

r- 

00 

0 

CO 

pH 

CO 

00 

00 

05 

05 

CM 

0 : 

50 

00 

0 

05 

0 


00 

0 


C4 

05 

50 

CM 

0 

0 

05 


CM 

50 

CO 


CO 


CO 

CM 

CM 


0 

CO 

CO 

CO 

00 

CM 

5C 

»o 

<4 

CO 

0 


»o 

05 

^H 

»o 

CO 


•k 

05 

CM* 

o' 

CO* 


«k 

00 

00 

■05 

“o 



CO 

CO 

*. 

50 

0 

50 


t'. 

CM* 

*• 

CO 

•> 

50 

•k 

?5 

P> 

0 



cT 

0 “ 

» 

pH 

m- 

<r> 

od 

0 05 

C4 

■^' 

■H" 

«« 

4- 


0 “ 

*. 

0 

f*4 

•( 



rX 

m 

P^ 

4>-* 

o’ 

CM 

•k 

CO 

50 

05 

r>. 

0 

05 


05 

05 



CO 

CO 



CM 

CO 

00 

00 

0 


»o 

50 

06 

pH 

CM 


^H 

CO 

CO 

0 

00 

0 

CO 

CO 

r'- 

CO 

0 

4>» 


CM 

4>» 



pH 

05 

00 

CO 

CO 

pH 

04 


CO 

CO 

50 

50 

CO 

50 

<0 

50 

50 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

0 

l>- 



r>. 

00 

00 

00 

00 

00 

05 

05 

0 

50 


50 

t>. 


00 

05 

0 

0 

pH 

CM 

CM 

M4 

CM 


lO 

CO 

CO 

50 

*0 

50 

»o 

CO 

CO 



«k 

05 













CM 






pH 

pH 



^H 


CM 

50 

CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 

CM 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

fpH 













CM 













CO 






















« 


O'pQj 
O op 
•p*-*-* 

£ fc <D 


v> 

M « 

°a 
^2 
Ip o 
gfl< 


a> 

*3 

$-4 

Jii 

o 


CO 

tN. 

«s 

04 

M' 


ooooo 

aH 

50 50 50 ^ 50 

<o*co*cocsrcsr 


»o 

C4 


00 

•5*' 

C4* 

CO 

CO 


e4'^04C4^oo^*-'t^r>-t^co 

2'C4050CO^*-'COQC40CO 

050t^’^005C400^5050 

»^^CCr^^*COtXcOC<rC4*CrD4*t>^ 

i-HC^UO-^COi-HCOCMCO^OCp 

rH ^ o 


04 

CO 

00 

04* 

8 

CM* 

04 




'i^' tN- O 05 

^ F-H CO O »C CO 


O CO 05 . . 
00 CO 


50O5Ci505’^t>.C004C0i—'CON- 
50Q 00 04r^005r}'Tt'50itf‘'-' 
0^-^'^04 0550 50CD00 04QO 


1—4^0404 


CO 

'lif 

t'- 


00 

00 


50 


04M'^COt^Oc0500'^00 

»-'®00Ol'^05i-<i-<C0CDt^04 

’VOC4^05q0C005*O05O'5^ 

5 . 5 “ CO ^ 

5OQt'«»l^00*^‘O'TfcOCS*O5O 

rH®cMC0O5C0’i^05C5c0l>»5O 


■'flJ'ioec € 0*00 CC eo^-^^ior 


*45 

Ui 


o 

45 


CO 

CM 

o 


o 

CO 

4^ 


CM?0050>-*^C0C0OCMe000 00 
CMQ01-'C004COC004»-I04'^00 
CD004 05 04rf4t^COCM 


1 1 —I CO 


Soo8o4’iC-<14^C4^ 
M4 ^ 50 CO 04 ^ 


CO" oT co" > 0 * '^* ^*cd‘co* Q 
CO 04 'Fj' 1-H 05 »0 

^ 1-H CM ^ O 

pH ^ ^ *-4 f-T f^ —H f-H 1—H ^ wH cm 


CO 

f'. 

CM 

o* 

pH 

CO 

CO* 

CO 


C0C0pHM4»-iCM00005OpH«itf*CO 
F^O«-'50 50QCO»Ot^CMC050 
00'^O05pH^C0t^'^CDt^C0 

'»f**C^i-'*C^'^5o“o tC»--r50*04*1^ 
hp^05CO®0'^000'^HfpH 

•^50G0^0400»-H'^0c0^ 
CM* CM* CM* CM* 04* CM* CM* CM* CM* CO CO* 50* 


3 

50 

CO* 

»o 

0 - 

00 * 

CO 


COOO'itf'COM*!—•C004»-'00*-''^ 
OOC005^50C000CMt'-i-HCM 
Oi-405t>*OpCOTj*t^COCOOOcO 

c^od‘tX“^co'^*cd‘ori^*cDoo05* 

OOCOCM^CM^f-*‘i--iCOcO» 0 ^ 

04CMC05O05C0iOCD05'^C0C0 

coco*c^5o‘'^’^*^'^*Hjr5oe^oo 


o 

!>. 

CO 

oT 

05 

CO 

50 

CO 


COOOiOrHCOHfCO'M'iOO^ 

CfeCOCMC4^^C00^05CCO 

^04COi—'QC0O5h-.C000COi—' 
COOOOQOCOC004’^^5005 
'M'OCO«05525 oO*^COCO’-^»0 

od' F-«rcdC4*CM*ed^cdcd'^od»-r 

Ji-HpHpHpHpHpHCM 



CM 

00 

CMCOOSt-'.’^COCOOCMCOOOCM 

COO5CM00CMCOcOCM»-'CMi^'^ 

^^4-«»’<<t>.'5J4b-COCMi-4COO 

50 

4^ 

504>-COCOCMOCM05CMoO»-h 05 
00CMO50 00CM00C000^''J'00 
t'^^OOCO»^»0»OOOOOCMOO 

5.0 

04 

O5H'i-hC0'-h»OCO5OO55O00O5 
hJ^oOf- i4-N.CM’kJ'C04>»CM’^0'^ 
<'CM<000CMO-^OO»O®04 

CO 

fH 

COCMCMCMt>.0500004-«-0500 

O5CM5OCO005O»O'^t>-CM4>.CO 

CO-^»OCOOCOC005050*Ot>- 

i 

c 

50*“ 

9 

_ P P«k»k«k*kP*k**»k«k*k 

0504>0b*—'CO5 Oi^hJi«Oc0’-h 
C 005CM-^»0C0CM’'^»-'Ht*05»0 
<4'<4U5 COCMf— ll-Hf-Hi-HCM-F^O 

05* 

4>- 

c? CM* ^*go*cd ^cd*d‘’Tf4‘cd' 50 ■^* 
O5O5-<4CMO5CMt->-F-HeO»OHt«00 
^50054>»CMOOCM-««t4wO'<' 

«w 

05 

p4 

00 

rX'i-H* oTcd CM* itf4*CM*i-r00 50 rX 
i^Hti^F^(3jCMAH<000«-4Oc0 
C0^^05f-Ht0i-Hl-Hi0c0c0'<4 

p 

PH 

00 

CM 

CO* ^* CD cd CO 0 CM*0550* 

^000500005054^00500^ 
*O«05OtN.00'-HCMC0OCM05i-' 

E-* 

CO* 

* 

«k pppp^ka^ppvk^k*' 

50* 

CO 

CM* CM* CM* CM* CM* CM* CM* CM* CM* CO* V CO* 

0 * 

tCtsTod cd" cX <0 tX od 

cX 

CM* idodccrcd'tXto-tsTtsjrorcM* tX 





05 

pH 


«^,-tFHi-Hi-4,-Hi-H^.-<CMCM 


s 

o 


C4 

04 


50 

g 

»o* 

CO 


C0cO00tSFC0C05OO55OOcO'5#» 
C005050500COi—450C050C004 
05 05C0C005C0C0i-hCMOC0CM 

CM* lO ^* iC 05*CM“ »0*-H"50‘cdCM*'^ 
lOOCO’^COCOCMCOCMOOCOCM 
OOF-<05 00 t^t>«. 0 pt^ 00 *-«t«» 

COCO CO 04*04*04“ 0*4* of of CO CO 


iD 

S 

’^* 

50 

50 

t>r 

50 


05tN.h-05|^00»-40'“'0450 0 
■^500050t>-00c00'ic»000 
C0»OOCMC^t'»c005OC)0'^-»4’ 

»o*cM*tNro cr50‘orGrQd“co* i-TicT 

i-*CMCMi-»OCOCMI^pHCOt>.00 

CMCOt^*0*-'00050C0005’i^ 

^ •^'“•^■v*''«4'co“cd'^'M4“50 5d"od‘ 


05 

o- 

05* 

CM 

CO 

CO* 

CM 


■^05CM'^—Hh»CM050C004i-^ 
»005O'^C0t>-C0«--.CMC0C005 
OCOOi—'CM' tJ'CM050’''CCMCMO 

•-'*odorGdoO*cd'cd''^50‘odcO*CM‘ 

Or^’-'COCOOO»OCOi--‘CMQOi-H 
Q0 0500t>*OT»‘F-iCMt--.i00005 


5Si2^l2:?9^aooo<P*^c^co 

OOt^05^tN.^F-H<0CM»-^b- 

05005CMTHt^eMO>pH500>Q r) 

00 CM’oTt^rco C^ 1 —T pX ^jT c<a 
■“•^05CD^-0050 C005^-0500 
1 -Ht—<C0'^t^00O5CM00»O00 

CO*05*04*0 0*0 00* <^1-H CM* CO* 0 “ 
’^i-4CMCMCM04^CMCMC4CMC0 


P 

o 

a 

•p 

p 

os 

u 

s 

5w 


03 


05 

CM 

05 


;SS 

-D CS»- 

•<4 

CO 

05 

, 133,950 
, 131,914 
, 179, 849 
, 895, 661 
, 762,197 
,591, 014 
, 552,889 
, 574,137 
, 537,151 
, 759, 401 
, 096, 798 
, 999, 973 

CO 

1-H 

00 

O05C04-^05C005H#*c005'«t'C0 

CMHl4COC005ar-CM'»#4tOh-4^ 

CM05H4t^COOCMOt^’^05FH 

05 

Ci- 

cO 

4^h*4^C0CD4^C0^CM054>.t>« 
CM4^00i-^-<4<0OOOi—(COCO 
F-^4^05t^05050505050C050 

aH 

00 

0 

•-hCM'i14qq05O4>-4>-CO5OO5CO 

004^CM05*OCOrfCM0050M'^ 

C0004^CMC005C0i^)^CMOC0 

P > CO 

P* Sh'P 

M D< P 

fH 

CM 

0 

4'- 

CO 

cp' CM *^4 c0 05'c6'-^’‘Hjr,-H“od<0"CM" 
d4QC005O4>.C0-ki4CMC0t-00 
50OO4'»C005 Oi-H'^CMC000 

05 ' 

CO 

00 

50 50“ cd‘cM*cD*odarcd‘i-4“ tXod5d“ 
05 i-ho00050000^H4'«C'COCO 
00COfHiO5OCMCOcOCM5OC0CO 

50* 

0 

oro5*tX‘cdcdcdodco*od*^* 5d“od 

C005CMCOCMCMcO^OiOfhC5 

OCMi>J400C0-i^C0’^C0C005O 

0 q 

H 03 

H* 

1 

’itf*H4-^cococococoeoco<4^ 

1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

50 

4--- 

1 

50 »d CO *d'5d ^'id ^o'io'c^tXcM* 

pH 

liiiiaiii.il 

tx 

4^ 

pH 

TfT 50“ rX tjT c»d CM* CM* f-T CM* CO cd cd 

,-ki-HFH,-HFH,-H.-Hi-H,.H,.Hi-HCM 

05* 

pH 

CO 

i£f4^^5fd'-Fj«*Ht!“CM*Tj7“-Td‘d“055d 

CMCSJCOCMCMCMCMCMC^CMCMCO 


>5 

>>S 

'a SpP 
c3 S ^ 

-S rt ‘5 rt p ^ Of 9. 


>5<» 


45 


W 

. P 

>5 b£ 


"■§ 


U’^Xi 
‘^00 
gg 




O 

CO 

05 


>» 

>»!S 
b 2.P 
P P 

^ Xi 5 - t-, 


M ill 
III a a 


03 


CO 

05 


>» 
>5^ 

P 
P 


H»-<500020 H^fr<S<52>5i-^<5cQ02Q 


bri 

45 

Xi 


u 

05 


Im 

CO S p 

=3^0 9 S 


C5 


CM 

CO 

05 


cS 

P 


>5 

Ui 

Bxs 
2 

S ^ 


^1 


u 

45 

s1|§i 

->fr4S-<jS^h^<5cQO20 


84 













































































































































































































































































































«N 

C<l 

O 


C5 

f, 


<© 

o 




t^00000i0»-<;0»oc^0'^ 

*-'0»OL.'iOarH<000«-'*-.0><N 

<>l *-* lO c4 '^ ^ CC 

t^c>c^t^eocco»-Ht—loco^c 
oocooococooo>oooo«Dr>-co 


CO CO ec cs 


#1. 

CO 


CD 


Oi'crt;^^b-0>OC<l**i*'^f»iDcO 

o>’-'Oa5ooao<NO'-'cDt^i'» 

t-.*-<05rr't^o>oocoTr’^t^'^ 

C5t^CDCOt^M'«S'CDCOOOTft^ 
C50coeo<Mr^o ob-^nc^oj 
»0 4*40 tJ<'^D»DIC<»i-'C^C<JCO 


00 

05 

uo 

»D 

t'- 




00'S*^C0C0C0O'*I‘C^'^C'»O 
»-’0005;DC005 t<CMCCCDCO 

C0CO^t'»cDOit^»O?000*-«00 

CD05»0»00»0'^001-<COCOO 

C0'^iD.DOt>.CDi0C005QC^ 

05>-Hi-h,^005050505050C^ 


o 

UO 

CO 


»0005t»C00005C«OOi-«<005 

C0c0i0*-H40»D1D<00000»0»0 

coOccb-»oc4*-‘coco«ouo'«j< 

»irj00DJC0»HC0D<u005»DC^O 

t>C0^05«-‘05OcD0PCS»000 

000050>CC050000050>»H 


o 

UTi 


i-lr-<D1t«»O>00<O»D'^O5»OCC 
b»CO<D^DI00O5b^f-Hb^?D»D 
C^a5COC^'^CCDIDIO> 


»o o 

c5cpi-H‘b^b^<^«tO.-H 

00^*«J<»005^b-»0_ 

05 05OO>00G000a0000505 


» ■» 

CO Di 


CMb».Ob-COOCCCb-40b»05 00 
CM00Ob.'***C0CMCM<DCM4O00 
‘05CDOb.CMTfb»CM-—'CC 

»o 

0 

CM 

COD5 40D<b-'^CDb-OCOGOCO 
4 — 1 —'CD*—•t'-b-40CM40CO»“'0 
COCDb-b-CM40CDOOCOCOCM40 

00 

b- 

40 00*-'CMCMb.*-ib-05’-rf<'^00 

4O'M*'-^b-00O5'*»'O>O5CD00CM 

CDC0 00 05xJ400b-b.*-'05X'^ 

CM 

X 

•Tj4b-’'>t«b‘05*-'CM0540b-Ob- 
*—'40b-CMTf*-t*40b.Ob-^X 
050X»D05’-^CDCDX40b-0 

40 

CD 

X 

COXXXb-b-050500'''t*’^ 

OXTf<CM40'-8fXXb.CMCMO 

b-CDXCD05’^05eO'Tt*b.CMT»4 

CM' cO 40‘CD 06'l> CD’ cD'cD b^ b^'c-^ 
CMCMCMDJCMD^CMCMCMCMblcO 
CMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMDICMC'I 

of 

8 

*—'CD^I—'''t*4D05CDO--H^»0 
COCMCMCOCOgQOOOlOOOO 
CMCMCMCMCMCMwMeNCOCOCOCO 

0 

§8 

*-'C0XCM40CD'^''-4<CMCDO*-' 
.-*.-jO*—**“ 4i—'CMCMCOCO-st*^ 
cococococococococococoeo 

0 

40 

0 

'^XX40X*-'CMCDCM05tO»-H 
^X DCOCMXXTt4'-!?'40CD 

0 

05 

b- 

CM 

Tt* ' 

!00.-'b-.-HXXXQ'^05 
3X000500—'b.00O5Q 
?^^^i040»D»Ot0400 


co" 


CO 


0 

40 


<0 




b- 

05 

CD 

Dl 

CO 




CDCD05iOO«-HC<l-«!fiOD»t>.0 
u0Ot'-4O’-«05»DCOC>400C0a> 
b-»-*OOCCt^Tj<C^COOO»—'DlTf* 

Oi^OOCOt^i-^ C<r CO O lo'CO 
00*000'^'3‘05COOCt>-b-05Dl 
*-'00000505050505050 


Dl 


<M 


UO 

CO 

0 s 

GO 
»—t 
rt* 


COCOD3t->»'^'*«C'b-0 05’-'CD 
q0tt<O5CD^0O«-'C^CSICOQ0 


d5CDOC5NC^O>»OOOiOOCO 

^05 05k00505CDcDCO'—'COCO 
n:?05'^ococ^cocoi-i»D»ooo 
0050000000000 

.Ni—- M c4^C^"(^^D^'^^D^CsfciDi 


uo 

oc 

05 

00 

CO 

•v 

»c 

CM 


05*-'CDcOOCb-OODICD00 05QO 
05i—'t^<005r'-b-»DC0i—'COO 
CO'«fl>-CD'^*-'t'-00COCDO5t' 

io'00 O t-TcO G>'05* 

O O 05 »-H 1 -H qo f-' 

CMCM'CMCMDfcMDfDfcMCMCMCT 


CO OC *—I »c O^ 
CO 05 ID CO oc 


CO 

CO 

CO 

o 

CD 


f' 


CD05000b*05*-HO»000‘DcO 

C0-Tj*b-C0'*i‘b-O00t>-00'M*--' 

05T-ii-lcOCDCr‘r-ix«}*0>I'-CDCM 

0 K » 0 ‘ 0 S^^^ 0 S 0 s 0 >, 0 sm> 

g '^e005a5'-‘b-05*-H*-<*Db- 
»D05CD**fCOT-'*-*CO*-'COCO 
CMeoeococoTfTtiTt*io<DcDb- 

cmcmcm'cmcmcmcmcmcmcmcmcm' 


05 

CD 

00 

0 » 

b- 

CM 

CO 

p» 

t'. 

CO 


COb^i-'i—'O‘0C0O5b-CD00C0 
05^»00500000cp*—l»-C’^05 
^05 *-'OOCD»-h050«OcD’^0 


cob-ooo^b-»ooco»ooeM 

05 05'»f^i-HiOb.»005CMb»CD 
b»b-0505000i-'r-ce0'^‘0 

C<fCM‘CM‘CM‘c*OCO‘cOCOCOCOCOCO 


X 

CDX»D05b.050XT«OObl 
05XCDblCD005a-. CMb-CD05 
Oirf^Dl'rr*XCM''t«b-i-HOb- 

0 

05-<^'’M*rj-40XCMb-’Tl*b-CM’M* 

b. 

CM05 05COXCMCDXCMCMb.'-«< 

b. 

Xb-X40'^WCM’'t*XX05C0 

CM 

CM'TfXOcDXQCMX—4b-CO 
CM'^CM--*CM’^«tJ*40tJ 4CMX 
—'CMCM005CM400CD40*-Hb- 

b- 


4OTfC0OCM'TT*CMb»X'—'C005 

W 

CD05COCDXC0050505''C40b- 

^b.X050CMb-t'-Xrfb-X 

0 

b-Cp*“'OOCi0 40CM0500505*-^ 
40CM»0—'CM—4X’^XX05X 

»o 


»o 

XTr050b»xo5coo5»-'’*^'0 

CM 

CO 

'-S* 

x" 

0 000000000^PS 

CD^40 05b.X0005CD'^X 

•k 

t'- 

—TcD 40'05"x"x"--rbT 40 c^os" CD 

0 

fSs-^aoooc3C'^oo^coc^\c>ui' 


iC V—TCM"<^x"eO 40 CM o"CM of 

CD 

i-TcdoocTo— r^toooc^odco 
Xb-I-HWCM-—' 

0 

eO'^Ob-»0’^'*t'CM — CMiOb- 
X X X CM CM CM D4 CM CM -M D1 DJ 

CM 

CO Qb.l'-XCM400'*f*-'XcD 
CMCMCMwNCMXXTf-^totoO 

X 

O05 X 40CM4OCDCDO'*^*’kt*C0 
CMCMCOTl'40COCDb-XX050 


XXXCMb.XOX05C0X'D 
—4C0TfCDb-O5CDXCDC^b.^ 

CD 

CM 

0 

40 



CDO^DXOO-^CDOXCOO 

•k 

^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ 

•k 

—'--H—t — 1-H—(f-HDI 

«k 

CO 

cm" cm" cm cf cm" CM CM CM* cm" cm" CM C»0 

0 

b- 

40 

coe-^coco'co’c’O-^toocDcobT 


0^ 0 0 0 •.A^«k«k«k^«k 

b.XXX05050505000i-l 

**H .H 


t 


•««#*CD05»-'00000-1''T?'05CDO 

t>.b-'-»*CDCMCOCDOO*“'b-*Ob- 

•-ib»C5»C'MiOb-,MCOiO'^*-' 

^t'^o>CiC<S't'^aQC>t^oooofS 
•r-'^COCDC^CO’-^CMT'-CO 
b"C0CC»0*0‘^^^^ ^■^40 

CO** CO" CO*" CO" CO CO*" CO CO*‘cO CO CO CO 


o 

€50 


00 

b- 

CD 

rM 


00O5*-'b0CDCO4O’"!t<CO*—'CDgC' 
*-'C50500b»O05D5CD0CC0O 
b-cDb-CDCMb-’'fO*~l05b»05 

t^CAaicot^oooo^iScc^^'^ 

b-00-^*-<4CCOb>»^CDCD'»?<40 

•^•Tj'*O4-O»OCDCDb^b^0CO5''^< 

co‘'c0*'c*0 COCO CO CO"cO''co'‘co' 


o 

00 

00 

0 s 

Cl 

*rf* 

00 

o' 

CD 


CD0CCD00C0C04Db-b-'*t«OO 
*—'400^05*—'CO*—'^CMCMi-hi-h 
CD40Tj'tCOCOCO'-«*050CDO 

c»ocooocob^*-rcoo5’'co‘*-^b^i"^ 

*—'l'-00 0040 40»-'*-'COCO’—'CD 
CDC0b^00 05O*-*CMCMC0-*^*»0 


O 


OC 

05 


C0C0b-OOC0‘OC0 00 00'^CD 
40b-40400Cb-lOb-004DCD*-' 
«^t<'^lC4O00O5CD*C»Ob*COCD 

cT<COOt^QO^C*i^fO^'^C^ 

C0b»CMa5CMa>'OO5’-'O5b-*-' 

b»0'?MC040b--^*-'b-D<OOiO 

4CC0C0CDcDCDb-00 00 05 05O 


CD 

00 


*cf 

b- 

b- 

m 

40 

40 


•^05b-'»st*C0040040b»05CO 
D5 05CM^00 00 0540-^r^0500 
C0b-b-4O'^00’Ct*C0CD00b»CM 

ooc<r'^‘"o‘<:^oroTjr4ooocM40 

C0'*^<rt<Tr*C0CDO00*-'*-'O00 

O5C0O5CM4O4OOCM000^b-i-H 

Oi-TwCvTcrDrcOCOCO^'^iO 




O CM CD 00 00 
lO-cj* O COCM 
05 05 00 

* •k 

CM CO b- 
*-< CM CO CD 


8 


b- 

40 

CD 

•O 

00 


•'tf'i'-.OOCDCOCMOO’-HOO-^'^ 
CDWC000CD4Ob-C0CMb»CC05 
'VO''f00CD05 05b-b-CM05CM 


1-H Tf OC' 40 CM 05 00 
b« b« b- b- CO CO 


00 O 05 b- 
CD b- CD CD 


40 

CD 

00 

0 s 

b. 

Tt* 

CO 


eooocD05oo»0404ocpo5b»’^ 

OSCOOCMTfb'CMCM^iOi-HCM 

*-i05CD*^CMb-*-'COb-TfcOO 

S ‘‘*^CMCrOb>rcr4OiOCDCP00 
C0CDc0c04O4O'*tf<^^^^ 


t 

I 


05 

CO 

CM 

cm" 

CO 


CD 


X —1 

CD 

05 Tt* 

40 

CO X 

'St* 

cc“40 


rt* X 

wM 

05 b. 

40 

bTeo 

0 

05 

40 

CO 


CM 


40 b. 40 1-H CO O »0 
00 CO *—■ *—I '*f 00 00 
^ CO *—' CD b' cD 

*-h"**C^CD CD 40 CO'cT 
CM 40 40 00 CM 05 b» 
^ 40 40 40 ^ 

iO r^ CO 00 
00 b- b» 


CD 

b* 

00 

CO 

CD 


»-40M*^40»—'CC05'^050CO 
CMO>00 05C0£JOC0CDOCM'^ 
40 0540c*0 0000c*0b»0b05»0 


05 CO 
I CM CO 


COO*-^OCMCM40'rf*-« 
CM<3i4O'^00OC0l'-00 
CMf-‘0t'»0 ^»0»0CO05C0O 

^ ^ ^ #w » v •k _ » _ » * ^ ^ 

CDb-OO*—'»*-'0*-'0005*-' 


CD 

05 

CD 


40 

b- 

CO 

CM 


CD CD 40 CM 00 ® b-40 05'tf ' 
00CMO*-»i0O00gC40i-HCMC0 
00b*’^*O*—ICCC’OCM0500CDCD 

g "0 C<r**H‘brc^40C^0^CDO'c0 
C040b-cDC00040CO«—'05-^ 
CDb-b-0'*fCM0040005»OOC 

r-*b-*-^*-^s.M40CO’^b*CD 

i-iCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCM 


CD 

05 

b- 

•» 

b. 

b- 

CD 

CO 

CM 


Tt<b-*-«0'^*^CMCOOOOCOO 
C0b.C0CMt^*-H^^^«^4O 


05 O Tf 00 CD 




00 


OCM0050CCC0050005b-05 
CMt'-CMl'-0'rf40b-40 05COb» 
CDb-O5e0*-‘O5iOO5'^'^b.b* 


*-« b- b. CO 05 »o 
CO CM CM CM <N CM 


b- 05 b* CO 


00 

CO 

00 

CO 

00 

CD 

cm" 


0>b«40 05 0540 c0^00*-'0505 
b»fHb«CD'^'—'400b»40b-CD 
CD'^b*b-'>5fb»05CD*-<00OC0 

CO*-'OOO^COOOCDQb--**f’^ 

CDb-0*-iOO*-'CO®CO^CD 

COCMCOCOCMCMCM*-H»Hr-H^i-H 


CD 

CD 


00»040000'^CM40 00CDCOb. 
00b-b.b-O05OCMC0’^*-HCM 
CM*-l00005-^b*C0040CDCD 

■*^i-H4000505*-Hb-b-*-HO^ 

C0C0CMC040rJ*00OOOb.05 


00 

CD 

b- 

§S 




OOCDCO'^^^CM‘^C^‘^00 
rf'g‘CM*-HCM4000005*-'^’’<f 
O *-'O CM 00 ^ 05 *—' O 


00 


»o 


^fOC^CO^<0 *-H 05 4D ^ t'- *-H 
eob-cDOcMb.'vOO?»oC*o 
iO'^40 05CM40b-»-«OCM0505 

CM''J<b-’^'ct»CMOCMCM'^b.b. 
CMCMCM -MCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCM 


CM 

1-^ 

40 

rt* 


b,CM4C*-HOO^OOOOC*0’^ 
CMTf'TbCDi-HCMCMb.OCOcbcC 
CMb-4Cb»'«t'‘'^*-''*t'OOCO D*-i 

b^cT ^"oO CD'*D05"iD‘cDOror*-H" 
O00 05 00 C0CMCM*-'CC00C0-^ 
40O00C0b»C0»O'«J‘*-^b-05t'- 

TfOO*-'COC<li—'■*rt*C0b*05’^ 
CMCMCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCOCO'*^' 


b. 


05 

O 

0 s 

b- 

co 

40 


OOi-'»-*OOOCMCOb»OOCM’-'CD 
OCOOCOCM*—'•^40 40 40*-'^-^ 
b»05b-»005CDOOOOCMGO’-lCD 

4o"co‘orC<r40‘CM"40‘cxr ^ooco' 

e0CDb-CD4O4O-^O5CMCD-^O5 
4O00CD*—'»O»O»OC0CDCDCDb- 

CO'''^<D'»OCO*-^’'!j^brcDorC^40‘ 


05 

CD 

4^ 

3 : 

b* 

s 


CMO5C5CMi-Hi-Ht-H4OCMb»00b- 

b.OC0b-C0O’^40CM0C*-'’-' 

tO->^O5CMCD*OO5*-'CD00CM4O 

O5CMC500CMCM f40*-i040CM 
eOCM^CDGCCMOlCO00CMO5CO 
b-b.00 05C0C0b.O>C000'^O 


0 05 00CO'^CO*-'0*-'*-'CM40 
CODiCMCMD^CMCMCMCMCMCMCM 


i04D40b-40O^b»OC5OO 

OOCOb.COOCO'^i-'CDCD*^’^ 

b«C0CM'^05’^'^05*-H00Ob« 

O4DCM“CM"br00CM‘*-!}^‘00Cr054O 

^*-HCMOb-CDb.05D505-^’^ 

000'<J'b.40CM*-H05*-'*H*^00 

•** •» •» «t 0 s ^ » 0 s ^ 

40 40CD’^—tO»-'*-^CMeM’Tt«b« 
CMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCMCM^CM 


CO 

CD 

to 


4C- 

00 


o 


OsCDb-Xb-X*-**—'05b-^-’«* 
cDc00040b''“*b.»OCMcDX 
COOb.’*3*'*t‘N«OXb-0050 

b- 

X 

XXOXX05X»0b-CM05»D 

1 —'O‘Qt-»<0CM D40CDOX05 
—t^OD<40040b-b.CMCDb- 

'•t* 

05 

CMXCMOCMX»OOCDCMb-CO 
CM40CD'si*054C-—»*—'b.05CM05 
b-0*-'CC400X*-'XCM'*t<-;I* 

CM 

CO 

40 

—*CD'-t*-—'OCDb-CDOXb-CO 
40CM'«t*Tl4X—'05400C005X 
,MXb-OOCMXb*Xb-D4X 

X 

05 

05 

C0OO40t0'^C0CMX»DXb. 
b-—‘40—*OCM’^'^05—I40C0 
040—'»0X05*-<CM—i-^COX 

C'^br—rC'^b^XbrcOb^CDCDX" 
<DCC*—'■^Ob-b-Xb-X—'OO 
b-CDCDCCX05CMC0’^*~^X05 

40* 

CD 

D1 

bT—rCM'^eo'CM''^b^»OOOr'<t*' 
1 -H—' OCDOCD*-^CDtOO^X 
—lXCD’'t*CM4D'«T'05CMb-4040 

•s 

CD 

CD 

b- 

CD cd‘o'e0‘cD‘05"05 x'co'o'b^'cd' 
tOXO'^toOjOb-XCOb.b- 
—'CDCD40CD'«t*OXO—IX»D 

0 

CM 

CO 

CO co’ O* b^ o* CO“ co‘ *-^‘ •-H 00 05 ’'cd" 
OC5CMXXCM—tX'-^*XC005 
—'C5*—'CM40 40O*—'»D05CD*'^ 

8 

rt* 

40 CD X CM b^ bi CM 40 cm' 0> b^ 
-kf*rt*Tt4XCO—1400X051-HX 
*-h05‘OXCDXCM—'CMDICMOS 

X*'^b-»D40X-HXCM»0b.X 

CMXXXXXXXXXXCM 

CD 

40‘cd'C^X"»^C* 5‘'^I* 05' CD‘CM‘b^ --i 
CMCMX'^»040»04040CDCDb. 

co" 

b- 

b- 

•k*k«k#k«««k»k*s*k#k#k^ 

OCMTt*XCMb-i-H40COb.COCD 

Xb-b-b.b-CCb-CDi040'M*X 

0 

0 

CO 

«.*k*>#k*t«k»k^*k^^#k 

*-'05 05b‘'^XCMi-«i-'*-'CM4O 
XCMCMCMCMCMCM«CMCMCMCMCM 


40* 40 o’rt* —-"o’ --^^CM Cm' cm* b^ 

CMCMCM^CMCMCMCMCMCMCMCM 


ai 


05 

40 

o 

00 

40 

o 

40 


CO 

40 

CM 

»o 

40 

eo 

40 


C3 

O 

w 

CO 

CO 

05 


C0CM<D05b-*-H05 4fvCCC0»O»O 
•^»-H40CDb-*—ib»40b»0*—'05 
40 00CD05CD00C0»-^OC000O 

40 *-H O 

>, ^^i-'05CD'^*-H 

OO'^t^’^COtOb-CO 


•s •v _ ^ • 

CM Tl* i-t CM O 40 
^ CO 05 


40 


CM 


CM"4o"-ro5"oo ^ £ 2 2S S2 

COCO'^COCOCOCOCOCOCO’Ct^CO 


eo 


CD 

00 

05 

00 


COrt<«Db-b*»0 00050C040CO 
*-'040CDOO^OOl'-COOOCMO 
C0 0040 t040Tt*»-Hb*05*-l'^b- 

CDCOOOCOCC’^CMOOOtOCOOS 
*—i’>si*40COCC05b»0'-4b-b.CO 
OOOb-1—iCMCO’-'b»040-ct*0 

ps 0 0 Ps 0 S 0 S 0 S 0 .^ 0 S 0 S 0 - 

Tfi-HOlOOSb-OOCOOcpi-HCD 
1 —<OOCD*0»040CDCDC0b»b» 


CO 

CM 

00 

o 

00 


00 

b. 

05 


00CD00 0040 05Ob.C0CDb»O 
CO*—'00C0OG0C0 4OO*—ICOO 
C0CD40 05CCC0CD4OC0e0O‘D 

O05 00CDC0OCMb*05b-C0*—I 
l'-OOOCMr-*40^'^40 05COb- 
I-^COCO’^CDtOCMOCMOOb-OS 

•^b.O500b-CMCD»O’rf4OC5CO 
OOb-b-b-b.b.b-b.b-00 00'5 


CM 

b. 

05 

05 " 

S 

00 

CM 


S O>i-Hi-h005CM0500cDi—'CM 
05O05«DC0»OCM00 05<DO 
b.CMeO»005»-'40COCO'rj*C040 

^ ft. 

S b»05''^^C0005*—'05 00b-*-' 
’*fb.CD00b»C0C0b.40 05O 
CO’-'b.40b-CMTf005‘0'*!t'0 

ocrcrcoqrco"crorroc" oO’-J'c^co 

0»-'»^000050505000 




00 

o 


§8 

O 


b-05b-0500’cf*-'CMC0CMCMO 

050b»eoooo^05^05to40 

COCOOOOC^OOcDtOOODl'^CD 

CDb-OOCMCDCM05*-«CD005CD 

b-CM050^CDb-i-'b*b-eO'^ 

CMCMOCMTj<COCOb.b-05CM*-< 

oro»-rbC'^“o'^cr*-^c^to*-? 

05050050505000000000005 


g CMCDb-CD*-lO^0G004O05 

1 —iOCMb.CM'*f''fOC’—'O*-! 
CMtOb-*—'O50CCO4D*—'b-i—'O 

b«b«CO‘*!t'4Ob-b-CO0CCMb-*—' 
GOb-40CDb-CMOCOOb-b-CD 
CO*—'00*-<40C005b.*-''»i*’-' 

CD0540CM*-^05CDOOb*0000 

COCO’^'«C*'^COCOCOCO'-?*»CGO 


05 

0 s 

b. 

40 


05 


40 00 CO 
»-H f fD 
*-« 05 ••'f 


b-S 
I eo "T* 


' *-< Tf b- O 05 
iQOrt^TfOb- 
' O CO CO CM t“l 


C04040CMTt*b-b'»005CO’—'b- 
' 0050*—'CDb-1—'05 05OC0 
CDCMCMCDb-CDCOOS*—'b*4--'^ 

io"CO**—'"*- h" cS 0^05 b- cm b- 

i-HO*-<CDCD40»OCDCDCDb-b« 


40 

b- 

0 

CD 

CO 

05 

«s 

O 

05 

05 


CDOC0»-'00CMO*-'40OC>CC 
40CM05C0CDwMCMOCM40 05CD 
CDO5O5b-CMC'0 J'*—'CD*—‘CO 


» «v 


§ OOCOCM'^CDb.CDOi-^CDC1 
40’^eOi-^CMb.00505COC5 
rflOtOCDtO*—'O^OOl'*’”' 

C000O 0500 C0b-C040CDO00 
O0b-00b-b-b-b-b-b»00 05 0 


CM 

CO 

o 

•s 

o 

s 

#s 

o 

CD 

CM 


05 05 O00C0b**-Hi-'?Db-b-*-l 

g CMCDO»-'Tf<*-<05b-l--»-'«0 
COCDC040'^b-CCOOCM05 


CM 40 *-» 00 40 CO *-' 
00000 4i0 05CD'^-.— 
C0i-'00 40CD’-'C00500 


•k ^ 

0>^0*-' 
CD ^ *0 GO 


I 


® I-H '-St* O ^ 
O *“< 1-H »—I O 


V-I 05 CO 05 CM CO ■*»* 
O 05 05 05 O O O 


'-sf* 

05 

CO 

cm" 

CD 

40 

0 

05 

05 

O 


GOOC5CDb-CMb.b-b-^b-CO 

CD^C000*-'05C0CD4Ob-»-HO 

05C0C0CMCM--H05O*-'»Db-CD 

0rc0O0rTt*"c0'«J^C0b^C0C’f05‘ 

tOO5'^»O*-'iO4OcDCM00CM00 

CM,-i--Hf-lCO»OCM40CDOOCMCO 

OGrCM0040--r40^CM"cOCDeM 

000050505000000000005 


>» 


5 . 

3 tx >» c 

ils^l 


® I« 63 

«s|aa 

•go|IS« 


C3 

o 

CO 

05 


sS-gJ : : l|i^i| ai-SJ 'J i|i|ii " ip§|ii 

>5CHS*^SSt-->-<i03O^P H-)H,I-SCQO^Q 


l-l 

o- I oj S 

w a a 

3 ^'S ® s 

>5 ® 


cc 


40 

CO 

05 


o3 


CO 

CO 

05 


>i 

U 

03 


>4 

u 


u 

a> 




eO 

O 

•4-4 

b- 

co 

05 


>4 

>*u 

C3 3*^ 

3 *- 


§ ® 


r > 4 «? 


o 

u^. 
03 S 03 



^ « o « 


85 


See footnotes at end of table. 























































































































































































































































































































































00 

I 

0\ 

Os 


t 

o 

s 

QO 

Q 

0 

Q 

•C 

k 

2 

'C 


99 

g 

0 

fc. 

00 

0 

fc. 

a, 

u 

0 

2 

H 

*c 

■§ 

s 

g- S 

-I ■■^ 

^ fl 

S 0 

3 U 

ot 

t 

•tm 

t 

u 

§ 


0) 

Q 

t 

e 

99 

•m 

99 

9i 

o 

0) 

«id 


«> 

am 

>T} 

*^S 

a.2 


cn 

Q 

3 


XJ 

9 


U 

a, 

"C 

2 

e 

•M 

•O 

2 

a. 

2 

S 

0 

s 

I 

fH 

1 


09 

O 

0 

s 

.S3 

VJ 

CO 

0! 


XJ 

9 

a 


CO 

C9 

a 

t>l 


CO 

o 

o 

a 

CQ 


03 

09 

2a 

o§, 
T3 O 
9 »M 

§C, 

CO 

&£ ^ 

9 O 

•3^ 

Irt 

03 


.£ 

*3 

£ 

« 

9 

C9 

O 


kO 

09 

h- 

CO 

cs 

09 




<o<oc<QC^coco«^oooooo 

rr<C^T.HO^C^09C009l^^Q 

09COO’^CO’^^t^CDcOcOOO 

S *‘ori-r t>ro9‘io ^fTcq w 

«-HTt<COr-.<OQOOi-HQCOTf< 
OOO 0»00 00 ^b« 00 WG 0 O 


0> 

■Wt3 

<1 


CO 

s 

o 

00 


•^ 00 t^’^t*-C 0 C^^COC^t»'O 9 
•-•OOt^'^kOC^i—'0090000*-* 
kO*-H'^OCOCOcOOO»009eOO 

O9CO0O*-^'cOCC’^'“QCO-^c4‘cld 
1 —'co'^io»ocot^ooog0900 
cO cO cO CO cO CO CO CO CO cO 


o S § 

**^ ® !9 

"^§•3 


t>. 

oo 

09 

kO 

c« 

o 

00 

«9 


r-'C^C^C 0 C 0 '-* 01 *-^i-*C 0 ’— 1 *-< 
009*-'i-<’^'^u5C^cocOQ*-‘ 
’^OC^Okr 50 cO^C^OO ®09 

co»ot^kOofko‘»rr^cfoo.-H“t-r 

Tt*^*^ 0 '^'^OCOO»COoO’"J* 

COt*-CO00CO00O9rHi-iC5cO''S^ 

cocoeocccococo’^'^’^’^'"'^ 


o 

09 9 
t09 

s,^ 

2.S3 

O to 
CO 
c3 


kO 

kO 

s 

t«- 


*'J'Q00 00 09CC00 09eCO>k009 
OO^COt^-''J*kO^^^''!?*COCO 
kCCO’^CDO'^^» 00 'V 090 

*“ g ^ of .-T koCO 0 O c^” o 


. - .t^ 09 CCt^C 0 t^ 09 Tj< 

■^ 40 c 0 t ^09 09 O»-'C^'^ 

F-' F^ ^ ^ ^ C^ 

^ ^ ^ W* ^ ^ W F^ »-H *-^ 


C3 

•M 

o 


00 

0» 


O9or^ooc^t^c^'^o-'tf*coc^ 

C9COkOC*9kOf-H—'r^iO*~*kC09 
’^09*-Ht^09i—'kOt^09C^0909 

OOQOt'^C^fOcOkOcO-^VcOkO 

ccf 5 ..^ootN.o^'-*’'»*ot ^09 

'^COa9O9»-*C0kO00O9F-iCOkO 

lOkOkOkcTcDCOCOCOCDt^t^t^ 


o-of^ 

2 S® 

Ph g,^ 
o 


o 

o 

o 

s 

00 

00 

00 


S COC^C^—'COt^COkOI—OTt* 

-Hi^cocot>«eoco^c^kooQ 

CDt^t^C 0 C^O 09 '^C 0’^’^00 


09 CO 09 coco 

kO CO CO l>- 


kO CO 

00 00 00 00 00 


GO 

M « 

03 

gPH 


.2 

49 

o 


C9 

*3 

•«^ 

C 9 

C9 

a 

Q 


2 

o 


s 

eo 

t>r 

o 

M 

eo 


O CO kO ko 

® C4 ^ 00 CO 00 CO 


^ o »o 

^■^C^oOkOkOcOf^i^^S^S 
cocrc^tCtCoTi-Tcpc^eokrri-r 

:?§ 2 : 8 S^ 8 SSS! 5 ig 5 S 

Q^^OOkOkOkfJiO'^-TtkOtC' 

cocococic^c5csc^c<ic^c4c^ 


2 

o 


00 


09 

eo 


Cl 




O9C»O9'^C*.^t>*01CI*«fkOC- 

k0k0l^Cl^OTfTfClC-C009 

^eococok0t^^09c-cocoko 

t-TiOF-Tcioroo^oocfTjrc^^ 

kocicOkoeooocociF-iocoFH 

’^^i-HCOOCOt«.O'' 0 'OOC* 

CO kO 09-^ g g ^g g 


09 O ^ ^ 1-H ^ 


9 : ® 

^ co*^ 

3 > w 

— ci«S 

2 ' 9 '^ 

o 0 

H « 


c- 

09 

kO 

o 

eo 

c^ 

eo 

'O* 

fH 


kOOO^'^090QCOClCl»OkO 

ot^09i-HiceO'^o*-*koooo 

•kJ*09eO*-HCO'-'COt^^t^C9'^ 

' o 09i-T CO 00'*1^’’ 

09.-HkO-Tf».HC10^»0 

I009»0k000cic009t>- 

■cf <N g g g5 g-g Q 


O F^ ^ F^ 


CO 


0 

o 

B 

0 

eo 

s 

>5 


OS 

•w 

o 

00 

s 


. >. 

Sa-g^ - ■ 

§ 09^ O' ” 


u 

49 

95 




3 


i^§a 

9 .^ a "" a'a > § 

§492 0.2 9 3 S ^ 


E 


iSS? 

cotn 

.-N O 


u 

. - 0 

.2 9"^ 
t? 49 
Q. 9 
w eo 

0,2 


o 

0 


CQ 


4> 


49 

'O 

cs 

SxJ Cl 

0 9-S 

S a 

>»*"' ^ 

cd CO c 6 

CO (m ^ 

49 o3 ® 

a2“ 

49 

^ <i> 3 

49>i O 

> CQ 

•fh bj&^ 

§.9^ 

o Q 

■s-as 

CD o 

«95CQ 

— 
corj 
^ 49 W 
>9 &*S 

*3 3 O 


2 

2 

49 

> 


'9 

A 


•u 

0 

CO 


49 

»p^ 

'S 

Im 


9^ 

0 &H © 

^ .5 

st>^ 

09 <1*®-.. 

2 49 0 fa'H'2 

a's §« £ ® 

2 m§ 

CO © 5 ^ S ^ 
49 ,9 ©TJ g 

s::^ 52 s 

hr*FF 'Tv h,/v 



o 

0 

o 

CO 

If, 

49 

0 

o 

o 


0 

49 

'd 

C9 

0 

.M 

CO 


49 

*9 

0 

9 

*0 

49 

>» 

o 

0 

a 

49 

eo 

0 

o 

2 

49 

0 


W fl 

t? O 

^© 

is ^ 

0O 
0 0 

•d 49 
® CO 
^ 0 
f2 o 
0"^ 


49 

0 


a s 


49 


00 


u 

49 

.0 


'd 
0 
© 

0 

© 

a 

0 

•3 

O' 

49 

CO* 

© 

•F< 

u 

09 
© 
a 

kFM 

o © 


'd 

49 

49 

0 


m 

bo 

0 

•F^ 

0 

© 

49 


a 

49 
GO 'o 

gw 

Kp 

*x ® 
o © 


•2 0 
w © 

© CO 
£ 49 


0 

o 


CO M 

2 © 

ss 
© © 

49 — 

•4^ © 

o > 

49 © 

to J_a 

2 O 

0 G 
£2 
mT 

CO CO ^ UfC 

'ff © CO ff Uj 

•3 « “-Ife 

-d VF -2 CQ 2 2 
© o ^ 

s ® s o 

2 0 a 0 

f S 3.2.S2 o 

^ ® ‘-.S fl w 


0 

o 

TO 

2 


Im 

0 

49 

h 

s 


© 

© 

© 


C9 


2 t> 


>. 

0 .-“ 
CO 73 

.2 a >- 2 ^ 


C3 0 «;r 0 . 0 :i5 

J 3.2 q 

to CO o ^ .a 
•so**.*?'© J^fO 


2 

49 

0 

o 


•g Js^S^-g 
1-3 

°gs«55^_ 

o'© a 0 0 ©5 


a 

© 


CO 

o 

C9 


CO 


to 

49 


a W .2 


•V fcF -w a 

ar^^ 


p3 CO 

'g w-S 2 g ©*^ 

*r ^.3 9 
2 0© two .9 5.2 


m 


o*Pc4 2 i> 

s- s.^ 

o 


•F O 
& 


.0 


o 

u 

a 


Os 

Os 


0 

0 

;:t 

0 

*c 

ll» 

;:j 

#v 

g 

0 

k 

tit) 

c 

u 

a* 

k 

o 

8 

0 

k 

• w* 

& 

k 

z 

z 

Vi 

z 

c 

k 

§ 

z 

0 

z 

0 

Vi 

•M 

Vi 

Vi 

z 

z 

0 

•m 

k 

a, 

z 

z 

•M 

kc> 

z 

a, 

■o- 

4i9 

c 

z 

0 

s 

1 

t 

o 

2 

eS 

H 



00 

fh 


kC C5 ^ kC ^ 
I'- CC CD CO 00 
t.- CO eo t>* Cl 

D 1 00 kd^odoT 

eo 01 40 F-i 


OC 0 ^l*F 00 00 00 kCC -00 
*-HOiC109C00^3 — COQ 
OiOO^eoOt^OCOkCO 

t>rt>rio'c^oicd‘‘d'FHkoo? 

CO eo *-H fh 

kO 


© 

0 

© 

Ff3 

CO 

• fF 

CO 

CO 

© 


X5 

9 

0 


CO 

© 

0 

>k 


.© 

*© 

© 

0 

CQ 


© 

fO 

'^'d 
o g 

■^3 

* 0.0 

.ff 

< 


09 

o 

<5 

kO 

kc 




OOOQOIfh OcO 09 ^ CO o-^ m . . 

t>F cs CO 1 -H o r -00 »o 09 00 — <0 09 kO -, 

t'F'^ CO .-H kO cs 00 — o *-* o t>-t*. 


IS 


cs es CO 


cTcd'iC^F^'kDcs'^eo 

..S’ 



F-:. 


0 

© 

h* 

0 

cs 

© 

© 

© 


© 

cs 

© 


0 

© 



q 

0 ^ 


© 

© 


r>- 

© 

© 

© 

kO 

cs 


© 




r>* 

© 

© 


© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 


t>- 


© 

bF 

GO 

cs 

00 

© 

© 


d 

w 



kd 

09 

0 

cs 

©' 

so 

© 


od 



od 

© 

© 

■d 

0 

d 

© 

© 

•H* 

CS 

00 


0 

cs 

00 

cs 

© 

0 


cs 

cs 

••M 

© 


r>. 






t** 





vH 






0 S 

© C9 

td 

















d 


«o> 


















49 

© 

g 

b£ 

0 

q 

CO 

oc 

1 

d 

F^ 

cr9 


0 

CO 

CO 



03 



© 

o 


© 

eo 

09 

kO 

CO 

oT 


©kCO^t^ 
eo © CO 09 

-H cs kO 00 © 
ko ocT Oi" os'od 

CO 01 00 1-* 


kOCSeO© 00 ©kO^-^FH 

OCSi-Hfh©©©OCO© 

oo©oot^©ficocs© 


o h- kQ09 
© cs © cs eo 




CO 

0 

9 

«M 

© 
• fF 

3 

9 

01 


© 

u 

© 

-d 

© 


w 

a 
© 
^ u 
© tc 
*d o 


u 

0 


0 
9 

CO 

bc a 
q o 


0 

(.F 

© 


Projects 

operated 

by the 

WPA 5 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

t 

1 

1 

1 

I 

I 

* 1 


1 

1 

1 

m 0 

1 

93^ a 

> 2 

1 

1 

a 

r^k? W) 

1 

1 

1 

01 

1 

t 

1 


© 

fcF 

3 

»F 

© 

0 

© 

o 


ti ® 
OS 

^2 


s 


•“•rs 

>fF ffi 


o 

o 

CO 

fH 


kO © CO fH 

cs©koeot^ 

00 © © *-^ CO 
t>- CO CO ^ t** 


F^CS 0 O©F-<©©kft<O^ 

csoeoeooocst'-kD.^cs 

©co©ocorFOw«© 

kd'edod'^odcO'-^gpcd'cd 

t>*^©©'^©©o^eo 

©FHCscsFHCSi-H^eo 



cs 


f—'• 

*-F 

00 

Tota 

kd 

cs 


© 


F-4 




© h- © © F-c 

cs © kD eo 1 >F 
© © © i-H eo 

09* oT oT kd" 
t..- © eo t** 


■^CSOO ©—*©©©©*-1 
CSOf5cOOQCSI>.iO*^CS 

©eooo©t>.ocscs© 

kded C30 00 *'cd f-Too coco 
C'-'^©©F^©© 0 ^eo 
©r^CS01*-HCSFMF-«CO 


© 

F-» 

o 


CS 

cs 


© 

00 

t>- 

kd 

SI 


fH cs © O 00 
© © ?1 cs © 
© © kD o O 

cs*'t'rorcs*'*^ 
F-i CO © eo © 


©.^F-«cs©©Fms.OCS 

cScs©©r^©t'F©FMF«4 

©CO©CO'*t*©COOO©CS 

© o id© odedt^oded*-H 

CSt«FCOF^OObFOFHt*.© 

t^FHcoeOFHcoMFieo 

•« 

cs 


-F © © 

S^'d © 


o-g o > 

C 4 9 rt 

^ 0 


CO 

^d 

.0 0 

KS 


CO 

© 


cs 

isT 


CO ^ eo © cs 
coo © CO © 
t** © CO eo 


©t*»CS©t^cO©CSl>.g 


t^.'^F-lOCOt'-’^-. 

cs © FH o CS 


© 

00 cs o 

ed od F^ cd F.r cTcs* 
© F-I o cs © 
cs cs Tf © cs ."t* cs 

©*“ 


©o 

1 oot** 

I © 


T? 

0 

© 

•» 

© 

© 

F.9 

CO- 

0 2 
•2 g 
• 2 !: 
> 9 

*ff a 

.2 3 

■a 

© 

5 

o 

© 

o 


0 

d 

2 

w 

u 

; 2 ; 


© 

F^ 

o 

H 


|s >2 

■SSfe 
5 C 0 © © 


M ri *0 

•3 c? O ♦ • 

5g«S 
•C 


® 1 - 

o^f® ® 
oS>; 


iJSfcF© — S© • ic 3 ® 

«W£3§Sa5®=o'|m 


•d 

,2 

© 


a 

o 


w~L^i^L^© 2 w».Fwgogro«j KtM »'*' 

ammzza cgnpQuiioJ.j.4S:z:;z: 

© © 

ss 


CO o Ss ^ ^ ca 

O 1.1 © © © ~ 


O 


© © 


0 

o 

o 


86 




















































































































































































oooo«o 

CO 

<0000 
*o 35 ^ 


h'lOC'J CO lO OCO CO <c 

O0*-HC^ Tj< o 00 O <0 O Tt< lO 

^C4lO 1-H 04 00 O Tt* CO o o 

oTc^Tio cT oeTco C4 ^ »o ^ t>r 

00 •-< C4 C4 l>-CO 04 

C4 ^ ^ 

C4 


OC0000>OC4O<3SO»00> 

0^004C^10COC400CO 

00»00>»0050c^i-i0b»0 

i-rotCt>r''^-^>^jre<rorc^od 

^ ^ ^ C4C4COt^i-H 

00 04 


CO 


o 

00 


o 

CO 

Tf 


0 

CO 

<0 

0 

CO 

<0 

o> 

C4 

WO 

CO 

wo 

M 

Oi 

00 

o 

C4 

o 

Oi 


o 

C4 


CO 

<0 

wo 

CO 

00 




h-i 

CO 


CS 

00 

CO 

C4 

o 

»o 

o 

o» 

00 



CO 

t>. 

wo 



0 

CO 

!>• 

CO 




CO 

00 

CO 

CS 

•l 

t- 

00 

^4 

<o 

|C 

C4 

s 

CO 

o 

*o 

•k 

S 4 

<0 

»H 

C4 

•« 

a 

04 

•k 

CO 

•1 

Oi 

00 

rH 

•1 

M 

CO 

•k 

a 

«» 

0 

M 

0 

•k 

CS 

GO 

o> 












•H 











COOi»OCO<DOjOO>00 

OOC4OC0OOC0$ 

cowo-^ojoi^oc^o 

0^•00^«•000^-C4<0 
''.0C0O<0’^00C4C4*O 
f-t »o 


2,286 

7, 434 

wo CS ^ 
Tt* 0 
Oi 0 wo 

<k^C0 

Tt^t^<OWOOOCSOi<0 

OoOOit^cOOwOO:© 

OCSoOOiOXOOiOOO 

^CS** 00 orC4CSCS 

rH Oi 

1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

i 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 

1 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t 

1 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

t 1 1 t 1 1 t 1 1 t 1 

1 « 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 i 1 1 1 1 t 

1 1 1 1 • i 1 1 ( 1 1 

1 1 1 t 1 • 1 1 1 1 ( 

319,336 

38,724 

1 1 1 t 1 

1 1 t 1 1 

111(1 

111(1 

1 1 t t 1 

1(111 
1(111 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 ( ( ( 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

• (III 

• till 

1 1 1 1 1 

24,865 

9,099 

1 1 ( 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 I 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

• 1 1 

t 1 1 

1 1 1 

t 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 ( 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1(111 

1 1 1 1 1 

i 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

t 1 t t 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

(•lit 

6 , 725 

10,200 

8 . 400 

74,295 

147,750 

5,134 

P<OWO<OCSOOCOWO 

Ph^W0Ci<0^'^f-(O 

OOiC40iOOI^CS»OOi 

cscot^rtCooTcoco^ 

I-IWOWOWOPM 1-HCS 

CO ^ CS 
COOiO 
^ ^ 

WO^-^ 
CS CO <0 
<D 1-H 00 

t-»-Ht'-COOi^W0t'^t^ 

COOiCOtOCSr>.CS»OkO 

t>-^W0CSi-i'^CO00’^ 

'^t^^WOOOOkOOiCOOCSO 

OOOWOb'.’kJ^i-tCOt^COO*-* 

O^OCO^wCSTj^OiOiOOi-l 

<0 p 
Oi M 
CO <0 

CS Oi wo ^ 0 
^ CO wo 
OOiWOCScO 

wo 0 

CO h* 
00 <D 

OOCOOi 
CS wo 
<0 

I-IOCSCSO 

Oi h- Oi 

00 wo <0 

OiQC4 

<0 ^ <0 

00 CS 
CSCO<D 
GO CS <0 

<C>CO<OwowOb-OiOiO 
i-Ht^01CSW0i-H.-HO»—• 
CO’'^<DC^WOb-Oit^OO 

'^'Oi 

CO<Dt^ 

oi CS 

wo 00 00 

'^“00 C^OO CS O'h^QO 
-^Oi C*-CO 00 CO 00 
CS 

<& 

^Oi'oi'^c^co‘TfJ'<d'cocsor 
•^COCO*^-^WO<DO>t^OO 
wo CO i-< »-H 

CO 00 

s- 

•k 

00 <0 I-H 

^ ^ 

•k ft. 

<0 CS 
wo CO 

». *k 

CS~ Oi CS CO CO 
<0 0 00 rH t^ 
0 I-H i-( 

•k •k 

CS Oi CO 
Oi Oi<0 

ags 

•k«h».«>«k«k«>*k«k 

Oif^O<DOiCS'kS<pWO 

kOkOii^GOCOCOi-lOt^ 

es ^ —< 


< 


Oi »o CS 
-H CS 0 
^<0»-( 

0 CO wo 

•kt* l'«<0 
wo 1 —1 CO 

wOOOCOOOOi-^t^<OCO 

COt^COCOCOr'-b-COCS 

COC'-'^CSOOCSCOWO 

00 c 

o< 

pwoOOOWOOiCOOCSO 

5wob-^i-<cor>»coow 

O00''^<FHCSTj(OiOi00»H 

CS 

CO rt* 
t*- CO 

CS Oi wo 1-4 0 
i-( CO wo t'- 
©OiW0CS<O 

0 © 
0 <0 

coco © 
'kS* CS wo 

© Tt4 I-H 

r-HOCSMO 
p © r'. 
© -04 t>« © 

CO wo © 
CS 0 CS 
k!»4 t>. 0 

© 00 © 
1^00© 
Oi © 

©©i-ii-4b»r^05cswo 

i-CkJ4W5CSi-4CSkOCSO 

coi040ir-k,j4T!4i-(csco 

<o<D“tkr 

cot^r- 

f-H 1—1 0 

<0 Oi 00 

oT^od'h^co'cT^i-H'or 
Tf( i-H b»copwo*^oo 
CO <0 

^OiOi’^COCO"^<OCOCSOi 
k^COCOi^^WOCDOib-OO 
wo CO 1 -H rH 

«k 

CS r^ 
00 wo 
CO 

•k flk Wk Vk 

^ 1—4 ^ 

i-TaH" 

00^ 

•k •k 

•k «k •t 

CS © CS coco 

©O00»-Ht>. 
0 1-4 1-4 

oToi CS 

2aj5 

^ Vk «k 

Oigwo 

•k«k«k.*k«k«k«k»«^ 

^•^t>.'^ocsco©r^ 

t>-i-(pCSO©i-(i-(© 

1 -H M wo CS -4 



•« 

<0 



«k 




•« 







CO© 
00 CO 
00T»4 

©0 © CS —4 
CS © wo 0 © 

® CO CO CO ^ 

© t- 
» M 
b« © 

© © '?4 

© © CS 
© 11^4 <«!t4 

CS© © © CS 
© ^ CS tk- © 
1 -IOWO'^t'. 

© Q © 
p © © 
P © Oi 

1 © 
(OOP 
It". CS 

•k «k 

f-( © 

I^CS 

•k Vk «k •> Vk 

fs. ts. wo k(t« CS 
ocsoco© 

cTm 

©CS 

p CO 

M CD © 

pk Pk Pk Pk p. 

Oi©Ort4© 

g©k^«© 

p p Pk 

CS CS Oi 

Oi«i-4 

1 Pk Pk 

(■^p 

1 © 

1 





Pk 


1 

1 

1 

1 

CO© 

»co 

©p©CSi-i 
CS © © 0 © 
00 CO CO CO 

© l> 
©C4 
© 

© © •kt4 

© © CS 
© 

cs©©©cs 

©^CSh-© 

l-^Oi©’^^k1 

©oco 
o©o6 
Oi © Oi 

!©i-4 

l©p 

It".cs 

t-cs 

Pk *k Vk Vk 

rk- h- © *^ CS 
OCSOCO® 

«k Pk 

QCS 

©CS 

Pk Pi Pk 

p k^l © 

M <D © 

oTcd 0 kiiJ'c^ 
© © "^ © © 
© *-4 

cs'csoi 

Oi©i-4 

1 Pk Pk 

• kC4P 

1 © 

1 

ft 





fH 


f 

1 

1 

1 

1 

to 0 

»-( QO 

© t>> 

r- © ^ CO *-4 

© ©CO © es 

© CS © © 1-4 

© © 
© p 
•^cs 

^»© 
OC-© 
© © © 

© © h- © CS 
© 0 ©CO 0 
fh rt4 CS CS tk« 

ag§ 

©00 

p 1-4 t". 
1-4 tk.© 

PC-O 

•k ^ 

CS 

© 00 
00 

wo WOOiO-k^ 

1-1 © 1 -H wo 0 
^ ^ ^ 

*k Pk 

CTk?^ 

©fk-CD 

Pk Pk Pk Pk 

CS©CO©Q 

©tk.CS'«t?© 

P 1-4 1-H CS 1-4 

cscscs 

P Oi p 
CSCSM 

Pk ^ p^ 

CS tk- 
P fH ^ 
CSf-4 





p 

CS 




« 

S3S 

S OM 
lO 


<0 rf* CO 
rf< 00 00 
oooo 

cri-TirT 
to CO <o 
C4 


OO-Ht^lOb-COCOCOCO 

oor^t>»oMoot^_ 

COOCOOWO^O^I-^O 

O»0O'^OM00i-^h« 

tOOO'-«^CO'5?»-HT*<CO 

00 00 <o 


g »-i^Oi-HO<Oi-<0^l^ 
»-«<*^^0t^'^0’-H<C>00 
C4rrOMC0C0^OOOb« 

•t •t ^ _«* •«•»«» •t _ 

<0C4C0t>-OOO'^t^OO 
C0»CMC0O<0»0C4»0»0 
^ ^ CO 


OO-^I^’-'COCDM'^OO 

Tj<t^tN,cOt>.OOi-HOOi-H 

O« 000 O 00 »O 00 OM 

<0 CO rfl“ eo oo 

ot^ 


»o t>- 

3 3 S 

S '^o m' 
1-1 *o 


<D CO 
Tf< 00 00 

oooo 

O ‘O 
^OgJO 


oo^ior^cocoocoo 

OOt>-t>»OMOOt^O 

00000»0»0-^1-HO 


»oO'^OMOOi-<r«- 
Q0i-H—ICO^’-^^CO 
00 00 Oi-H 


C4 


^rt*Oi^O<Oi-HOTf<t^ 
^^0b»'^0’-<<000 

o ■ 


M CO CO rH o O 


g 




CO»OMCOOO»ftC4»0 


CO 


00^-4^CO<OMt#<00 

’«(t't^cooor^c0i-io0i-^ 

O»0»HO00u5c0OC4 

<o CO cvT o' CO ■'iJ'o 
l^iOb-OC^wS ot^ 


S C4 O 


CO 


h-O O 
o OM 
—< ^ —< 


<0000 CO C4 00 UO C4 ^ CO O C4 
OOO*^ 04tOOCOi-H<P 
CO^"^ 


MUOOCOi-HOt^COCO 
tO<Tt<i-iM<D<Ol^00rt< 

»HCO^ QO'o (N'm" 04^00 C<fl^ 
M C4 UO O O ^ O h-CO <O00M 
TJ4 ^ 


’>ti^^-OOO^W0'«t*O<Dt^ 

OOi-HO<Oi-i<OCOOOOOQ 

MOOOr«»OtO<DOOOOOO 

«h •* •• •*_•• 

t^MM»-<C0C4C0O^i-<O 

’^t>iOt«-t>*<OCO» 00 < 0»0 

^<0^r-4C4<^ 


rf*COMC^IOCOi-<<OeO 

<OC4qOQO’-Ht^OM 

C0OO®C4OOC0O 


t^oopg 


, __/I'iri-iuoco'^ 

^ r-t CO <0 C4 ^ C4 ^ 


CS 0 fH 

01 " © 

tk. CS t- 

© © 0 

t". t- tk. 
© © p 

tk-©©Tt4©t'-1-4l-(© 
©Ptk-CSi—ICS©©© 
©©PCSOOCS'kJi© 

OOtk-©P©©©Qi-(© 

©GDOP©'-H©f-4PfH'^ 

.-H©©CSk|#*©©l-l©©P 

© © 
00 

tk.© 

t- tk. ©© *Ft4 

© 00 Tt4 1-4 k(J4 

«Mtk.O© 

p 0 
p © 
M 0 

© fH p 
tk. CO fH 

© <D © 

C4 P CO ^ 

CS FH CO © t"' 

cst-pwo© 

© © -^ 
© p © 
Tt4 © 

fH 0 W5 

0 -4 fH 
© fH © 

r^cstk.©©FH©w5FH 

©©0©CSCS^'Tf«P 

G0W0©tk-©FH©W3O 

e^<D t-T 
© ^ t- 
CS © *-* 

0 wo'ccT 
© 0 © 

CS © fH 

•kPkPPiPkPkPWPkPk 

O^CS©k!t4©P'^^ 
j^^CSfhPOOf^© 
fH k«J1 <0 P CS fH 1 -^ 

oTod'croroocd'tkrk^^wo'tk^ 

©©FM©pGO©t-'^©rk. 

l-( fH kk}4 t- F-4 © -<^4 

fH wo 

k«t< p 
© 

F^ © ’TJ4 ^ ^ 

CS©CS©F-( 
fH CS F-4 

t-^ CS 
p p 

fH 

<b wo 

■4t4 tk- © 

tk^ © tk^ 06 

tk-0©©lk- 
0 M F-4 CS rH 

ki}4 Cs’ 
CS CS 0 

©«kJ4-iJ4 

tk-’cop’ 

M © fH 

©w^o 6 <Dtk;p©w 6 Q 
fhO©Pi— i©W5©© 
CSCS©f4©CS cscs 



fh" oT 


c< 




CO 





+ 



H 

5Z 

» 

o 

w 

H 

a 

o 

z 


! © o 

® B^d d 

3 « &fS5 

eo^ d — 
d OS'® ® 
2 •<-» .S H 

O rt o ^ 
oOm.SWfeSooE-' 

a 3 


Sfbo 
03 O 
W .2 

• • J. 

•Srf? ftP 


03 


s a 


CO 


2 o 


®o 

W 3 ! • 


GO oS 


-§ 

a 

03 


r 


.2 

a„ 

0,2 •: 


t» 


cS 

id 
C5 

^.20 
CO d 
03 o i: 

“^5 


© o 


•= 5 Qw I 
^ § 
a M 


w f> ^ rt 

“■35 g' 2 -^ aS 0^3 gp:-c 2 h35 
MH^-gPfeOPUM SQSm JMco 2 

*3 “ 

3 S 


43 


® ja 

ZO 


iai 

- S §-3 

g O.S © a 

i3a.S®3 

<00001 


See footnotes at end of table. 






























































































































































































































fl 

0 

u 

CN| 

Os 


Q 

K. 

0 

0 

k. 

s 

9\ 

«0 

g 

o 

u 

0 

li« 

a, 

k 

0 

0 

1^ 

•o 

cS 

• li* 

& 

Ik 

c 

s 

v> 

U) 

t 

•m 

ii. 

o 

"C 

e 

o 

c 

0 

CO 

•M 

CO 

fc 

O 

Q) 

4k 

o 

Im 

0. 

t, 

0 

o 

•M 

-c 

«4 


4k 

s;^ 

s 

0 

S 

I 

c4 


c^ 

2 

e 2 


eo 42 

•c° 

£2 


® OOCO 

04 ^ $ 04 

ID QO 04 CO 

r'.QC4'^t' 
coo -4 

CO CO C'. 

ID 

04 

C'. 

t'- 'Cf O 
CO O rH 

coo 00 

O ^ ID 
ID h- ID 
i-H ID CO 

CO 04 CO 04 ^ 04 
04 C- 1^4 '«J' CO CO 
Tf< C4 CO C- 00 00 

i-« h- ID 
CD 04 CO 
CO ID Tji 

807 

483 

CO r^- ID 
14. C5 CO 
00 CO ^ 

— 04 04 04 
04 O O ID 
^ CO CO 00 

^ *1 

C4 ID -H CD 

1-H 

i-H cb c<i 

CO C^4 00 

CO 

04 1—< -4 

04 04 O 

r4 

04 OO’ 
04 04 O- 
^ 04 

04 00 ^ ^ O 
*'4 ^ CO 04 

lb CO 04 
rH 00»-l 

i- 

eo 

^ 04 ID 
04 

gocoocft 


-^OiC5C^C^05<:00 


O CO 


r-< Oi ;0 t«- 


5i O 

S 


O 00 «-* CO O OJ 04 »C COCO 

»— «V 04Oi O‘O UO h*-*-« 

04 CO ^ 


8 

a 

« 

4^ 

CO 

CO 

cn 

03 

_o 

s 

D 

a 


C; 

a 

>> 


ce 

o 

a 

CO 


X3 

"^73 

O P 

tjS 

-< 


0> t>> lo 04 
O Ci 04 ^ 
CO »0 04 -o* 

tfTco CO'«jJ‘ 

4^ »0 ^ 


•4>A 

C3 P 

o a> S 

■*^'0 u 

'd o2 

<5 

0^ o 
73 


CO CD O 
ID O 04 
ID 00 O ID 

*k •• 

ID 1—1 r>- 04 

04 CO 04 
^ CO 


9 
9 O 

b/)P 
03 CO 

JL -IJ 

*U CO 

O C0 
C/4 

ed 



CSj ,-(,-( C4 

1 i 

1 1 00 rt' 

00 O 

1 

1 -Ji 

O C4 

1 

1 

CO O 04 coo • 

O CO 

1 

1 



1 1 

1 o ' 

i 

i 

1 

’OC 


O ID 


00 ID O CO 

1 1 04 00 

<N O 

- 00 

Q 04 

1 

04 IQ 04 f-4 O • 

O ID 

t 

CO 


•CO 1 

• 00 

■ -•C' 

ooi'-iDr>.eor>-cD04 

t-o 


00 Tf* CO o 

• '04 O 

t' O 


CO 

1 

t'. »-« 04 CO "■S' 1 

O OO 

1 

04 


1 CO • 

• CO 

' 

ooo»Dr'-i-4cooco 

04 CO 

<0 

oobo'U' 

1 1 ^ ID 

CO GO 


<b^ 

1 

04 CO CO CO 00 ' 


1 

t 

lb 

1 

1 

* * 

1 ^ 1 

• 00 

1 «» 

' C'. 

cooco-4^,-Mcbo6 

CO C'. 


CO S «CO 

1 1 »D O 

CO '5f' 

ID 


1 

1 

CO 

1 

04 


11—t 1 

1 

1 

O0-'O00iDC4*«rcOiD 

eo ID 

W 

Eh 

CO 

1 l .-4 

1 1 

1 i 
• ■ 


1 

1 

1 

1 


1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

• 


k 

1 

t 

• 



t 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

t 

1 

1 

r 

1 

1 

1 

1 

CO 4*1 ID 1-4 




CO 

04 

00 

ID 


CO 

co” 


CO 

CO 

!>• 

00 

eo 


ID 

ID 

ID 

4^ 


04 

04 

oT 




04 

w 04 CO 
04 CO CO CO 00 



CO 

CO 

04 

ID 

04 


O 

s 


CO 

00 

00 


04 t-i 00 O O 
00 Tf 00 ID ID 
04 00 CO CO CO CO 


CO 04 04 CO 

04 04 04 


O 


oc> 


*-H o 

O CO 
00 O 


^ 04 ^ CO O 
04 04 04 CO TT* 
O O CO 


CO 00 I-" »—t 

CO ^ CO 04 O 
CO 1—t 




ID 


O ID 

c-o 

04 CO 
CO 

eo ID 


ID 

CO 

oo" 


m 

'O 

P 

a 

9 

3 

s 

Ph 


03 

9 2 

'2 S 

® 03 
Pk 


bO 

© 

Ui 

Q. 


9 
T? 

9 ^ 

P'S 

to O 

.S^ 

p 

03 

» 


to *0 

•g © «-* 

®s£-< 
s'® >>?::' 


^ to P 

> fe 2 
2 


© 

*© 


03 

u 

9 

P 

© 

o 


•“*5? 

Im © 

03 : 

^2 


o 

CO 

»D 


9,si 

rs u. 


•ki -Tti coco 

> • <1-4 

ID Q CO « 

ICO 1-4 

i4j'04i-4b-.t'- 

1 1 ID 

CO IC o o 

1-4 1-4 O CO 

1-4 04 O 

1 » 1 o 

ID O 04 1 

1 04 CO 

1 O CO ID 04 

1 1 ID 

04 o b- o o 

CO ID 00'^ 

4t CO 04 ^ 

1 1 1 ^ 
111 

O 04 4t' 1 

1 

1 1-4 

i 

• 00 04 CO 00 04 

• ICO 

1 ■ 

eo o 04 1-4 o 

CO OO 1-^ 1-4 

’^"woToT 

« 1 ICO 

#V ^ «l * 

CO CO O • 

• 04 CO* 

• '^'‘ 04 od 04“ 00 

1 ■ 00 

1-4 cbod 

t^Tosibcb 

ID h- OOCO 

t 1 1 

'If CO 00 • 

1 ^ 

• CO *“• 

1 I 

CO .-H I'— r*4 



04 ID o 
O 04 O 
O 04 CO CO 




h- r>» 'isf' 
GO CO 00 
»D 04 


04 ^ 04 

l-H Q »-• 

»D ^ t-l 


10 ID 

SS 


CO 04 
04 ID 


O 04 


CQ 

•4-» 

o 


CO CO 
1—I 04 Q ^ 
CO ^ 

^i-ToToT 
ID r- 00 CO 
•-« 



ID O CO 1 
ID O 04 i 
O 04 ^ • 

• CO *-( 

• 04 CO 

1 ^ 1-4 

• Q CO »D 04 

1 00 04 CO 00 04 

1 1 ID 

1 1 ID 

1 1 CO 

• • 

CO 'Tt' ID o O 

04 o r- efi o 

CO O 04 .-4 O 

1-4 1-4 O CO 

CO ID 00 Tji 

CO 00 *“H 1-1 

04 ID o t'- O 
4t« O 04 O Q 
O ^ CO CO O 

04 1-4 04 

ID O »-• 

ID ID 

SS 

CO 

CO cb o • 

CO 00 1 

1 

• 04C0’' 

1 'tfi 

1 

1^04 00 04 00 
• CO 1-H 

1 ^ 

■ 1 
• *00 

1 1 

1 1 

^ O CO 00 
eo —4 1 >» ^ 

lO <c» 

^ h- b- Tt* O 
c>- 00 eo GO ^ 
ID 04 

00 04 
C4 »D 

lb 04’ 


03 

>4^ 

o 


CD ID ID 

1 1 

• I 00 »D 

CO O CO 494 

O 04 44 


♦ • 04 00 

1 • 04 ^ 

1 t 

00 O 04 00 
04 4}H 44 

Q 04 CO 
O 04 -4 

iboocb 

• 1 ^4 

cb ^ o lb 

CO CO 

00 rf* t>. O 

1 1 ID 44 

O CO 00 ID 

49* 

^t-H ID 1—4 

1 1 44 

1 1 




cOTfTj^t'.t^rN. 

04 ID CO ID 04 
!>• 04 »-H 04 04 04 


CO ID 
CO O h- , - 
»D O C4 00 


^ 04 O I-* 
CO CO 00 04 
CO o« ^ 00 


04 t*- CD 1-4 1-H 00 
CO •-• 04 


ID 00 00 
CO 


CD Tji O O 00 
ID rH I'-.CO 


t- 00 »D CO 
»-4 04 ^ 


04 CO 1^4 00CO CO 100 
CO h-C-CO 04 CO O t^rH 
1-4 o 00 Or-H 04 00 0-00 

O^OOcTcOfh'cDi-^O^ od04 
»D 01 « CO 00 04 1 -^ 04 

05 ^ ^ CSJ ,—( i-H 04 


O 

f-g'sl 


ID ID 'It' 1-4 
04 O 04 O- 
00 O 00 

t>r<o“ofco 

l-H '«J4 ^ »-i 
»“H ^ ik ^ 


t- Q o 04 
00 O ^ 04 
CO CO CO f'N 


00 O- O- '«J4 
O CO 04 04 
ID 04 


g eo CO 
04 00 
t*- ■'O 04 


04 CO O CO CO CO 
T»4 CO 00 04 04 CO 
1 -* 04 Tt4 to o *-< 


^ CO O 
CO »D 04 
CO 00 


CO ^-. 1-H h- ID 
04 00 ID »-( CO 
CO 1-H ID 


04 ■4t4 04 CO 
00 CO 00 
C- O ^ C'* 


i'^ 00 CO <0 
CO t>- 04 
04 


CO ^ »-4 CO 
1-* I-H O ID 




04 04 


CO 


04 CO t'- CO 04 CO 
04 04 CO i-t 


sss 


rf» t-h ID CO CO 
04 04 t'- CO 


h- CO CO 
CO O i-« 04 


CO ID CO O CO 04 CO CO ust'O 
Tt'ID CO 04 r-CO 04 -t '04 

I-'^ 1-H CO 04 »-t CO ID r-ID 

t^c^ofoT^-oT'^eo o^Tco 

CO 00 Tji CO GO 0- lDi-« 

1-Ht>-1—li-s04C0C^04 eOf-H 

04 


•G 

a 

<s 

© 

cO 

■4-» 

Q C3 

a <p 

O u 
w 03 

> 9 

C3 

73^ 

sU 

Pi 
cQ 


73 

© 

p 

p 

p 

o 

Q 


8 


<5 

03 

H 

z 

o 

m 

H 

p 

o 


© 

© 


cC P'S 

>Xi o 


< 

D3 

H 

u 

o 

s 

H 

p 

o 

OQ 

a 

z 

< 

Q 


t a 


g © ®2 s ^ 

CO 


H 

< 

H 

n 

p 

o 

OQ 


03 

ja 

b£) 

p 


© 


p 

o 

bo 

p 

,p 

CO 

oS 


pp" 

o .. 

tU'zi 

^'S 

11 


© 


fa 


• • p iP © o 

aEoS-s® 0-: 

03 'POT* 

<i 


© 

03.2 

1 § 

<i jLf •• 

• • .w p 
9© s 
a**- 

rt CO 


CO 

(X> '-■ 


© 

u 

o 

a 


'P C8 
ce P3 


p 

o 

4^ 

CO 

© 

'H 

03 




O ^ 2 c3 

JnCi QP34^.©g 'P 
0 ©.lli^*POOTQ'jP 

^ ^ flj 


' » I 

© eo © 

-- •I'H 

•53 


© .a o 

rsi^rT 


W), 

o P p 

© © O 


o ®4j 2-^0 ® o g y>’a> 

^ 2 lo|sis| 5 ^ii-s 

"Zoi 

S is r- r3 P 


© 

P 


73 

p 


P P 

fe o_2 ^ a 

eo . -O ® 


C 

© 

4-4 

b£' 

P 

P 

P 

• • 

03 


to 2 

is 2 P.S ^ " 


©' 


•• «r-l © P 


C5 


© 

P 

cS 


© 

S 

D 

-*5 

pH 

o 

z 

< 


< 

H 

Z 

P 

O 


to 

© 

© 


CO 


&A l«k 

2 S 


CO 

© 


Pop 

6i)73 © © § 

.. p p B'X 2 

.S'C ® «Qp^ 

S Sd s s s 

jPmOcqqqcq 

3 
o 


©^ 

>92 

S-« 

Q .. 

PhS®^ 

°a-“ 


P o3 


2§..-a®r'^ 

'^ © © oS 

OOP^ 


88 


1 See app. A for the territory included in each urban area. Figures which relate to territory other * Not initiated until 1933. 

than that shown for the area in app. A are footnoted. * Not initiated until 1935. 

2 Excludes cost of administration; of materials, equipment, and other items incident to operation «Includes direct and work relief and aid to veterans, 

of work programs; and of transient care. t Relates to city. 

* Includes statutory aid to veterans administered on basis of need. 


























































































































































































o 

Os 


0 

K 

0 

0 

tl. 

M 

s 

0 

k. 

V) 

c 

k. 

a, 

1^ 

k. 

0 

g 


0 

k. 

*»^ 

k. 

c: 

S 

eo 

fet) 

£ 

•M 

e 

>« 

S 

c 

fj 

Q 

«i^ 

v> 

•iW 

CC 

•D 

0 

c 

4« 

e 

•m 

k 

a. 

c: 

0 

•m 

!3 

s 

a, 

kd 

c 

s 

o 

s 

I 

CO 

1 

U 

pS 

S 

o 

H 


w 

'C 

a 

s 


s 

Pm 



o 

fO 

•k 

<£> 


00 


00 CO oc^ 
COOO^CDO 
»0 CO 00 1-1 CO 


Oi-H»HcoM*oo^coc<it^e<iooc^ 

COC^t^r<Hi-(f-HC<liOiOC^CO^O 

0irH'^»O'^O»O05O0i00CO0> 


COcOOSi-iCto 1-1 CO »-i 0> 0> 

‘ot* 0& ^ ic *■«< c^ioo c^i-Hoor'*(^ 
f—I o 


^ W5 rM 
00 O i-H 

40 o> r^ 

cfoo t>r 
f-ic^c« 


t^g^C04O<or^c4^e«r> 


Qi 






»o 

o» 


'^40401^1—lOJiOt^CO 
00^ g CO ^ 40 40 o 

•v 

40 


t:rco«coococ^esio 

0 *~<C^^OiCOCOC^CO 

^ ^ ^ • •fc 

*-»C^C^C0^i-H'^04t^C«»^ 
O CO 


Sf2 

00 40 

CO 00 
CO 1-i 

to 



o 

o 

G 

09 

•4^ 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CQ 


3 

a 


CO 

a> 

a 

>) 


oS 

o 

o 

a 

CQ 


OP 

o c 
■*^ 

<1 


40 

1C« 

40 

CO 

CP 




40 CO C^ CO 40 
C^i-i»OOOt^ 
CO I-H *C CO 

•n »S •> 

04 e^co 


04»OiOe4C400C4000POOb- 

C0C0Oi-I40tJ<^C004O00»-I 

oocpt^c^cococor^-^cpcot^ 

CO C0 00 40^»0 04"*-r-^ CftC 


40 0 0 »-< O 1 -H CO o © »0 C^ CO 

CO t>» •—• ^ 00 40 04 o O CO »o h- 

O ♦-« CO O CO 40 05 COCO O 


_ ^ ♦» #« 

C4 40 ^ 40 ^ 


00 

05 


_ A Ph 

ococoe4 


r^ S 
o o CP 

■^ns u 

TJ C!2 
—1 0.73 
<* D.J3 
4) c> 
T} 


t^eo 
C4 1-* 
05 r- 

jHoT 

O'^ 


00 

t>. 

05“ 

05 

O 

oT 


^ CO 05 ^ 

CO 05 05 11^ 40 
C4 40 00 05 


C4C040Oi-'‘^t^Oh-t^C0i-HC0 

OCOOTti(NCOOi-HC5^COt>-CO 

t^OOi-HOPi-tTtHOOOPi-ii-tC^O 


O O 
Tt- »0 CO X 


t>- 


CO00t^C^4O'^00C4t>.«rMtj<i-t 
CM 05 CO 05 40 ■' ■ 


CM CO t>»00 


t-05 O ^ ^ 0540 CO 00 O CO ^ 
CM 05 CD i!t< TJHO 05 40 05 40 CM CO 

O CM CO O 40 h-40 o 40 40 CD 

f—I CM CO O 00 05 40 1—I CO IJ* 

05 CM o CM i--t^0404005 

*-H CM 1 -M CO r-4 1-4 


S t^*O^Q040i-H^05Tj«0> 
CM4OiiO0QCO00t>-i-tt^O5 
4OcDrHCM00X4OCOi-li-H 

•4 ^ •» 

t>-b»t^QCCM404005 
COCOCO'i^‘'^CO^-l>» 

40 CO 


00 

CD ^ 
005 


riD CO 

40 C 

5o-j* 

^ hC 



2 SS 
^ 00 

1-4 

s ss 


4P 
OP CP 
W) 0 
c3 ce 

73 tn 
•—< 

o ^ 

CS 


05 

CO 

CO 

05 

CO 

o 

4^ 




CO 

<4.2 

o 


CM 

CO 

oc 

v 

r- 

o 

cf 

CM 


CD 05 T-4 o CO 
O O 40 CO CM 
05 00 O »0 00 


^OOOCMCOCMOPCOCDt^COOOCO 
C005.—iiot^OOi-Hi^^CMTt-i-HOOcO 
»005t>.COCMTj<t^40^000050 


OcOi-Ht^t'- 
^ *D CO 00 1-t 


TfCpCDCMrf’Ocpd'-O^CD 


OOCMO’^’^0»0»-I’^ 
tM 


CO 00 CO 


CM050 40O 00 CO 00 40 40 o 

CDcDt^ 00 CM CM f-H 1-1 05 00 l>. 
OCD40 O’—‘CMCO4OC0O51—it^ 

COi>t^ COOi CC tc <o 

05 Cm o 40 CO »-H-Mi I-H 40 »0 05 
1 —i CM 1—i CO CO ^ 


5:^400500401-^1^05^05 
QCM40 40ooco«r'-»-ir^05 
040<Di-HCM00 0040eO»-‘^ 

t-TtCiCorT cm" ir^U5“cT40 40 c^ 
COCOCOTJ^’UiCOt'.t'.CDOi^^ 
40 CO rH I-H 


iO 

05 CO 
05 CO 

CO O 

or- 


CM o 
00 

*4 — •* 

eoo 


CO 

1-4 

9 
T’ 

OP 

t-l 

OP 

73 

a 
0 
CO M 
bjD b 

o s 

u 

CQ 


s 

cS 

t-t 

bc 

o 

Ui 

Oi 


Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA 5 

1 

1 

1 

1 

i 

1 

1 

1 

1 

« 

1 

i 

1 

Civil 
Works 
Program < 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 


9 

% 

U4 

U4 

9 

G 

9 

o 


^ ss 
^2 


CO 

t- 

CM* 

CD 

00 




*-4 O 
CO CM 
00 CO 

t^co 

CO 

CM 


o 

o 


It* 

00 

CO 

s' 


0 

1 

' 0 CO 

0 

T 

1 0 40 

0 

1 

1 

1 0 1- 

1 

»k 

1 

' •k 

1 10 to 

00 


11—11- 


1® 


CO 

u 


CD 

g 

00 

CO 

CO 

0 

CO 


0 

CD 

00 

0 

It* 

CD 

iC 


CD 


■"f 

rH 

0 

r- 

of) 

CO 

CO 

*0 

r- 

00 

CO 

on 

05 

CD 

00 

CO 

00 

0 

CM 

CO 

If 


CM 

CM 

tN. 

CO 

05 

0 

r- 


•It* 

05 

t- 

CO 

’It* 

0 

0 

CO 

CO 

If 

05 

05 

4C 

CM 

05 

00 

Tf 

CD 

rt* 

CO 

»o 

CD 

40 

05 

CO 

00 

CM 

CM 

CD 

CO 

CO 

05 

0 

05 

CD 

(T) 

0 

•*f 

CO 

Tt* 

CM 

*f 

00 


CM 

00 


05 

CD 


05 

CM 

’t* 


r- 

I- 

»o 

CM 

05 

Cl 

If 

r- 

00 

40 

t- 

40 

CM 

05 

05 

00 

<D 

CM 

If 

fH 

00 

0 

*-o 


t- 

05 

00 


CM 

CD 

0 


00 

r- 


•k 

r- 


05 

CO 

CO 

05 

CM 

00 

CD 

CD 

CM 

cn 


CD 

05 


0 

CO 

•o 


0 

t- 

00 

40 

00 

05 

CM 

0 

05 

CO 


CO 

r- 

CO 

CM 

05 

t- 

CD 

If 

CD 

CO 

05 

•4 

40 

«k 

tC 

•> 


40 

0 

t- 

00 

05 

CD 

r- 

CO 


CO 

CO 

CO 

It* 

CO 

40 

00 

CO 

r- 

00 

40 

t- 

CO 



05 


C4 

40 

CD 

00 


CM 

CO 

If 

CO 

0 

0 

CM 


CO 

Hf 

40 

CO 

Tt* 

40 

CO 


CO 




CM 


CO 

»o 

CM 

CO 

CM 


40 


CO 

CO 






40 


CD 



CM 










CO 



CO 

05 



CO 


CQ 

•4.2 

o 

H 


It* 

40 

t- 

oT 

r- 

'Ct* 

40 

CO 


i-« 00 CO CO O 
CD CO 05 t-. CO 
1 J* 1—I 1—t 05 CD 

oTco c^c^oT 

05 Tf I>* CM 05 
CO CO 


e0400cDOOOit*C040it*CDi-i’it* 
it*00OC0C0-^05 05 4OCMO500Tf* 
’n’DicMit*i-Hr-r*40CM05c<'^r- 

CM*‘cDCDCDCMCO‘i-rcCrori-r<rrc040 

COOCO«-*COCOCO’’^CD»OOOCOt- 
CM ^ CO »0 CM CO CM 1-H 40 COCO 

#1. 

CO 


4 —i o r- 

COrhCO 

00 »c r- 

r- o t- 

00 40t- 
•’»* 


00COCO4Or-»-HCD00O5 
40CD*OC5COifCMCMCD 
40CM05 0500'^CM’’«fi-t 


cDooo5r-t-o>coi-* 
O5t-(O5CMO54OCO00 
40 CD 1-1 1-H CM 


38 


CDOOCOOOOCMCO'^’-'CMCM 

C0C005O^CC00OifCD-t* 

ooo40i-Hr..05oo^CM«oo 

COt3“cgC4fortCcD'M*'cDcpor 


CM 


I ■^eOOOCMi^CDU* 

CO 1-H CO 


t-cD 
CM Tt* 
I#* 00 

40 t^r 
40 CO 
05 


050 

w 

It* 40 



CD 

r- r- If CO CO 


00 

cor- Tf 0 40 

, 

»o 

CO 05 CM *0 If 

as 

-1-^ 


f «k •« ». 

"If 

0 05 r- If b- 


40 

If 05 0 1 —* i-H 

W 

40 

Vk 

■f* CO 1-H CM 1-H 





40 






r—COOOOi“*CMCO’r**i-< 
O 00 1—1 


- - - . - 05 05r- 

00 1 -H CM i-« Tf 00 r-O CD o 
CM05r<-it*CM4Ci-HCD05^iit*C0 

t-^COCi'oOtD'^CQt^tOCit-^^tS 
'it*C0it*4Ot'-C0004OT-»tN,i-lrH4O 
o CM40 CM CM 1 -H CO '•t*t-i-H 

ijr 


CO 05 r- 
CM P O 
05 CM CO 


OOO 40 

r-oo 

CD »H 




eor«»cocooo5i-<co05 

S oor-i-H*ocOi-«oo 
COi-(COC0COCMc5O5 

Tt<COCMi-ib*i-Hi-(^t- 
I-* 05 O 1-H CO CO i-« 1-H 

Vk 

^ 05 T—I 


COCOCMoOOr-‘M*OOOcOi-H 

Tt*co404or-05cor-cDcO’^ 

co4ocMCMOr-r-co4ooocM 

cTur^OCMCo'CM'cO^i^'io" 
40cDCM05oor-oooi-Hr-o5 
fH f-H CO t- 1 -H CM 1 <* 


CM CO 
CM 00 

*«* ’l^ 

cm“oo 

CO O 
CO 1 H 

•k 

CM 


CM 


coco 




^ o 

€3 73n-5 73 05 

.4J'o2 £73 
o ^ p > i 

^ S ® 


a 


o,S 




CO 

40 

0 

If 

40 

0 

t- 



-t* 

40 

0 


r- 

CO 

00 


t- 

05 

t- 

*<f 

00 

00 

40 

40 

CD 


00 

*«f 

40 

00 

r- 

r- 

"rf 

•If 

r- 


on 

r- 

r- 

00 

CO 

CO 

0 


0 

CD 

CO 

CD 

CD 

CO 

0 

on 

0 

CM 

Tt* 

CO 

05 

CO 

05 

t— 


0 

0 

t- 


r*^ 


C-> 

CD 


fH 

CO 

If 

If 


05 

00 

CT> 

CO 


on 

0 

CD 

CO 

05 

00 

»o 

00 

05 

CO 


CO 

t- 

05 

Tf 

CO 

CO 

00 

CM 

CD 

0 

r- 

00 

05 

00 

1 - 

40 


0 

CO 

CO 

CM 

Tf 

40 

00 

CO 

0 

t’- 

05 

CD 

If 

CD 

0 

^H 

0 

05 

T-S 

"'f 


CM 

0 

0 

CO 

CO 

r- 

40 

CD 

00 

CD 

40 


r- 

CO 

00 

00 


’f 

If 

40 

r~> 

CO 

h- 

CO 

CO 

>0 

CO 

*0 

»o 

*f 

05 

00 


•*f 

40 

•'f 

40 

05 

»o 

r- 

••f 

on 

CO 

40 

•« 

CO 

«k 

h- 

r- 

05 

t- 


0 

CO 

CD 

OQ 

00 

CD 

c:y5 

05 

40 

»o 

If 

05 

0 

00 

C\ 

05 

0 


CM 

05 

CO 

c5 

p 


CO 

l>- 

-f 

CD 

00 


CM 

CM 

00 

CM 

05 

00 

-If 


05 

CM 

CO 


»o 


CO 

rM 

CD 


If 

40 

CM 

If 

CO 


CD 


40 

r- 

CM 

CM 

00 

CM 

CH 

i-H 

0 

CM 

40 

CO 


CM 



^H 



t- 

0 


CO 

40 

05 


•k 

40 






■If 

















CM 


If 


•k 

1 -H 










•k 

pH 





CO 



»o ^ 
00 00 
00 

-t*''co 
00 05 


73 

a 

03 

9 

4^ 

OS 

4^ 

CQ- 

ag 
•2 £ 
iQ? 
> 9 

•— cQ 

o. 

«0 

i-t 

bo 

o 

9 

o 


9 

4^ 

o 


fl •'C 
•pop,. 

K .- 2 gas 

.sS..2"Wog 


CP - 

9 9 
973 > CP 

“•E-" e- 


73 

u 

a 

'C3 

Ga 

o 

•4-5 


OP fe 

bo” 
P O 


_ „^§S|«S=5a'|«._„ 

cp*H^i®i®CPca®*H^Po30 0,4^ 


G 

o 

o 


cQ as 


CP 

CP 

p 

CP 

73 

> 

o 

u 

Ph 

• ♦ 

73 

G 

p 

^-4 

CO 

h-i 

© 

73 

o 

.a 

Ph 


o 

1-4 

55 

-<5 

Hi 

Eh 

m 

hI 

Q 

Q 



IJ 

§ 

o 

g 

p 

o 




© 

& 

.. C3 

CO 5> 

fl 


© 

a 


O (p 
» d 

w.— •• 

• • •— ^ p3 

iS-fl afl 

gOco.^f^f^ 

M 


gtj 

> o 


a a 


89 


See footnotes at end of table. 





























































































































































































































4) 

u 

• M 

0 

U 

I 

On 


O 

k. 

O 

Q 

k 

s 

V3 


0 

K 

0 

^ 

Cl, 

1^ 

!.« 

0 

8 

o 

"0 

'B 

& 

Ik 

"O 

c 

w 

ffi 

to 

:t 

•M 

c 

im 

o 

"O 

e 

0 

o 

o 

0 

o 

4y 

fio 

•M 

QC 

o 

0 

•mi 

k. 

a, 

'o 

e 

e 

o 

• m 

)c 

s 

a, 

'S* 

•w 

ct 

s 

0 

S 

T 

CO 


0^ 

s 

08 

H 


2* 

05 iS 

>v, 

•c 

Ph*S 


00 o *-• 

•-• ^ 

cc >o 

S *‘cf»r5 

(?< ^ 


Q Hj* 
40 

Ot- 

COtJ'W 
TP t- 05 
0500 

1-H005005 
CO 05 0 0 1-H 
05 coot- 

sss 

40 05 CO 

COQCO 
Htt 40 1-H 
00 TP CO 

O00i-5C005Q<DC005 
Ttlt-OC^OO0540 C0 
4 Ohh05XW»OO5C5i-h 

0 CO 00 b- 

CO 40 CO 
TP 00 00 0 

00 Hjf 
CO 05 

05 hh CO 
-H 05 

05*05 00 CO 
i-h^05 05 

CO 

00 oft-f 
CO CO 0 
1^ ^ 

tP COb-f 
t-COb- 
rH CO 

40c'fcoi-H‘ofofod‘t-i-f 

TPC005t-»OOOCOCOCO 
1-H 1-H 05 1-H 05 1-H 

40 00 05*05* 
40 1-05 

05 


o ^ <0 »-H 

t'- CO C^ 1-1 

C^J ^ o o 

^ CO ^ 


Oi kO CO 
tv. »o CO c 2 > 
CO »o o> to 

®sss 


»-• h- CO 
CO ^ 
^ 

tCcD’^'‘ 

CO CO 
I-H CO 


CO oo 
CO O 

o ^ 
rvTco 

C^CO 


o 

o 

fl 

03 

CO 

•M 

(« 

</l 

03 

o 

X5 

3 

u 




03 

o 

o 

a 

QQ 


a> 

.a 

'^'3 

o a 

ll 2 

TSS 

< 


lO t^ 

o »-< 
CD 00 

»« oT 
c^ 


»0 CO »o 
Oi o> 
t>.ooo 

COC^” o" 


OO*^ 05 Tt< t>v O CO o »o »o »-< ®»oco«-« 

COO«0 05 rf< lO ^ lO^ 1—I lO O CO 05 »0 

t^»OC^ CO C^ 00O CO T-t coc^t>»c^ 

f-j'coco CO co'cTcoc^'*-^ coocc^»o‘ 

00»O f-H CO *0 CO CO CO C<IOI »Of-» 


^ p a 

O 0) C> 
*^'3 »-• 

3 P2 
©r3 

<J g.J5 
® o 


QCO <35 
0 05 40 
0 05 0 

CO ^ 

00 0 

00 t- 

00 40 40 
Tp 05 05 
CO 05 1-H 

CO^i-HCOt- 
I— CO »-H 05 rH 
OCOCOi-hhP 

05 ^ CO 
CO CO CO 
005 t- 

HP 00 t- 
05 »0 t— 
1-H t— 05 

050050505i-h05040 

b-COi-HCOO5CO00i-HO5 

OOCOi-HCOOt-i-HOOcO 

05 00 ooo 

t— 1 -H -1^1 t— 

1 -H 0 TP 

1 1 05 40 

1 1 ^ f-H 

1 1 1 -^ 

1 I 

00 0 

CO 0 
40 0 

|05 

1 05 05 
It-CO 

1 0 40 

gss 

«t- 1 - 

40 1 -H C5 
hH 05 1 -H 

0 1 -H 

coco 

05 0 

CO* b-^ CD* 05* 00* 

05* 06 1 -H 
05 05 t- 
^H 

tPO’cO 
05 CO t— 

05* 0 0 Q b-^ 0 HP 

40b-'^05^cDi-HOc0 

^ 1 -H f-H 

05* 1 -’ f-4 0 

CO t— 05 40 

CO 

1 *C005 

( 1 40 f-H 

1 1 fH 

1 - 1 -^ 
CO 40 

\S 

i 

1 CO »c 

1 05 

1 

05 05 05 


® 

® ® 
bcp 
cfl 03 
j; 

“ CO 

O CO 

°3 


0 

' 05 

>0 

' 0 


‘ 0 


1 

CO 

• CO 


1 CO 


1 


03 

■4^ 

o 


coco 

00 c^ 

TJ4 lO 


00 »o »o 

TT 05 C^ 
CD 05 1-H 


CO 1-H CO t>* 
CO ^ 05 
O 00 CO »-H 


00 

00 t>- c^ 

05 CO 


00 •-« »-H CO 00 ^ lO CD 

S o CO r* o o CO c^ 

C^C^ CO CD CO »o0000 


»0 1-1 

w ^ 


CD »-H 

00 -^ 


05 O 


§S5g?S88 


«:»o c^ 

O 1-1 00 
C^ r-i 


1 C CO o 
005 00 


CO DJ t'- 
CO 


00 O CO 40 
005 0^5^00 
(N 1 -t 


coco 0 hh 

1 1 05 40 

000 

1 CO 

0 t- f-H 

00 CO 

CO 40 40 C5 

1 1 ^ f-H 

CO 0 

1 

0 I-H CO 

0 CO 40 

0 CO 00 t- 

1 1 rH w 

40 0 

I 1-H 

0 40 HP 

C5 b-1- 

05 40 0 40 

1 IC005 

1-H HP 

1 05 

CO 'tf^* TP* 

C5D5C5 

40 00 hH CO 

1 1 40 f-H 

CO 40 

lOO 

Hp 



40 


00 

Q00C5 

40 

Q CO CO 

I-H 

CO Hp 00 

•4 

05 

CO i-Tod 


CO 

05 

CO 

OI 


CO 

'3 

3 

3 

«M 

o 

3 

3 

Ph 


a 

u 

o 

TS 

® 


CO 

a 

feS 

® tlfl 

»3 o 

h< 

o. 


a 

3 

w-t*i 

a a 
•3^* 

03 


eo'3 

+^05® 

2 ® >*> 


^ b 
— o 


3 

c3 

Sm 

b£ 

o 

u 


® 

3 

u 

—H 

C 8 

® 

a 

® 

o 


u ® 

o;3 

^2 


CO ^ 
CO 
05 ^ 

05 —^ 
t>. 

6 ^b- 


40 


05 

40 

CO 

40“" 

05 




CO 

o 

CO 


0*3 

.b'qj 


85 


05 CO 
■Kj* 40 

•-• t^o 


40 C^ 

^ o 




CO 

00 

0 

00 

05 

05 


05 

CO 

Hp 

0 

b- 

CO 

CO 


c5 

0 

CO 

05 

40 

CO 

05 

00 

0 

TP 

05 

CO 

C5 

0 

tP 

CO 

CO 

CO 

TP 



CO 

CO 

t- 

40* 

c> 

^H 

CO 


00 

40 

oo 

b-T 

of 

CO 

0 * 

cf 

00 

CO 

CO 

CO 

t- 

0 

f^ 

0 

05 

CO 

TP 

CO 

40 






CO 

CO 

1 -H 



f-H 


rH 


1-400 4<5 CO O 40 CD40 05 


C0C0400505C0O^C0 

icTcT ccToTc^i^c^i-rorc^cr 

r- 401-1-COr-T-i r-05 

I-H 1-1 1-H T»« 


00 ^ 05 HP 

CO »0 0 b- 
1 -H 40 05 0 

fOZ 

008 

hH CO t- 40 
05 40 CO 

05 05t-Hp 

t- 05 t- 
CO CO 00 
f-H »0 »0 

• coco 
IQCO 
•005 

40cd*coo 
cot-05-^ 

00 i-H 

I ICO 

1 1 

1 1 

a a 

CO* 00 of TP 
CO 05 CO 

Iv 


lofco 

1 H*4 

1 


00 


03 

o 

&H 


85 


88 


05 CO 
. Tf 40 
1 -H t- O 

‘40C^*“ 

- - o 

C5 ^ **H 


CO 

00 

0 

CO 

05 

05 


05 

CD 

tP 

Q 

t- 

<0 

CO 

fH 


0 

CO 

05 

40 

CO 

05 

GO 

0 

Hp 

05 

CO 

05 

0 


CO 

CO 

CO 

Hp 


rH 

CO 

CO 

t- 

40 

cf 

* 

00 


GO 

40* 

» 

00 

t-f 

of 

CO 

0 

c> 

00 

CO 

CO 

CO 

t- 

Q 

^H 

0 

05 

CO 

Hp 

CO 

40 






00 

CO 



fH 


rH 



I-HOO »0 CO CO 05 CO ^ 40 CO 05 

coo Qc5 1 -H CO05 40CO 

C5 1 -H coo 40 0 05 cOO 05 CO 

lOcT CO oTco ofco i-ToTc^o 

!>. 40 r -40 40 -Tfi t- 1-1 05 

1-H f-H OO 1 -H »0 


00 1H iH TP 
^ 40 CO t- 
rH »0 40 0 

1 0 I tP 

IH CO t- Hp 
P5 tP 40 CO 
05 05 b- 00 

t- 05 t- 

• O lO 
ICO |05 

CO CO QO 
rH 40 »0 

40 CO 00 

CO t- 00 Tp 

• 1 c^ 

1 1 

C0*00 of rH* 
Hp CO 05 »0 


iH 05 ^ 

1 1 

r. 


coco 

g ?5 


05 


<o 


00 


03 

o 

b* 


85 


40 40 

T»* ^ 

O ^ 

co't'^HjT 
O CO 1 -H 
CO 1 -H 1 -H 


COCOt- 4O4OC0C5^ ^^05 05 CO 05 1 -H Tt4 40 05 1 -H 00 

> 1 ^ OOOO C0C0'VD5O 00 ^ O *-4 CO ^ r-05 CO 05 CO C5 00 o 

1 -H r-■'9't-'^OCOCO COCO^ 05 40 CO o C5 oo CO CO hj 4 »o CO C5 

C^'i-H i-ToO'i-h' ^C040‘orc5‘ oTf-TcO io'oo'^ ^C5‘co'40‘4^c^0r^c^ 

COt^OO »-H ^ o 1 -H 40 ^ Hf4 CO 0 05 40 CO 1 -H 40 1 -^ 40 CO CO t- 

IH O'^C5C0C5 cococo i-h i-H r-i C5 C5^ CO i-H C 01 -^ 


-H 05 40 
05 CO 05 o 

hH 1-1 <1«4 ^ 


S C5 05 
1-H 

00 1-c CO 

CO* 40“ 
40 C5 


05 CO t- 
Tj* 40 r- 
oo 05 05 

1^05*05*00 
O 05 05 CO 


t- 05 00 
CO 'Tjl 1-H 

*^oo 

CO 00 oT 
o 


00O5 ^ 

S t- 05 
CO 05 

05* of 


2 S 


-H ® 

-3’gl'o 

Di»— 


^ 40 CO 

0 40t^ 

»0 40 0 

Hp CO 

t-oO 

1 H 

Hp t- 00 

40 b- 0 

CO 40 

CO 40 05 05 CO 
05 0 40 rH 1 H 

0 00 0 ^ 0 

fH »0 HP 

40 05^ 
05 05 t— 

05 05 05 
40 CO 40 
t-05C0 

HH^ofO 
CO 40 CO 

HP 1—1 

OCO 
Hp 05 
05 

•-^of’^ 
»o t- 0 

HjTii^coco od" 

05 00 C0 05t- 
CO HP 05 CO 05 

b^Hp"^ 

00 0 

CO 40 Hp 

0 fH t— 
00 CO 05 
05 40 05 


>lCj4t-OHt*C04040t-0 
05Ht<0‘ib05 05 05COHt< 
i0'^i-HTfi-HO40C0C0 

i0^t^t^iO<OCCCCt>^ 

t>.*^^00i-H40t-C0O 

COCOt-tO’^’^ t-co 

of 


g 


t- 05 05 
<Tf* CD CO 
CO t- 05 Hjt 

of cTof 00 

Hf4 t- t- ?5 
t-C5 


O Ht* 4C o 
t- oo t- CO 
05 05 1 -H CO 


00 r- 05 40 

Q 05 05 HJ1 

« t- t- iO 


00 CO M* 
05 05 CO 

00 1-H 


1 -H o CO 
Tf4 r- 
05 40 CO 


t- rH 05 05 

^ ^ fH 00 

iH TP CO 


06 »o 

b- ^ 00 t- 

1 H 05 05 CO 
rH fH fH 05 

CO HP t- 

Hp CO 

CO 

fH 



*3 . 

a 

C9 

o 

cs 

flS 
o u 

^ § 

»3XJ 

aU 

•a 

03 

& 

8 

o 


'3 

® 

3 

a 

a 

o 

o 

i 

< 

OS 

t- 

z 

u 

o 

m 

H 

p 

o 

! 2 : 


*3 
® 

3 

P to 


® 


ga§§ 

o|«W 

I 5.3 HI 


CO 


2 .tJ O 


S5 s 

2*3 3 bf 

2 3 O 

3 

•3 

o 


a o © 

- «cqE^ 


®|y 

3Q33 g 

^ § 

3 M 


CO 03 5 
CO 2 

P A o 3 


CO 

a 

C3 


CO 


pi • tm 

^ 5 ^ 3iP «5 
»pj 3 3 c3iS ® 
a+3 PI:? 3 p 


>1 




3 

.p 

3 

a 


24-5*0+3 p 
p 3 


s §>s 2 g'alls" 5 §"« 

WE-'^SfifeOPnCQ gPScQ SMm 2 

a a ^ 

S 2 § ® 


O' ;r7 1 p 

^.20 

'^3 2 3 

S pM^ 

D 03 • w 




-3 

® 


p 

o 


® 

® 




p 

o 


c 3 

6 

izio 


» 2 P 3 j® Jh 3 rtp'^ 
P 33 ' 5 P^/-^^»*.P 03 

O ^ a P 5P3 2^ 3 W w 3 

£i||>3^.a^§-|a''3^ 

M a}.Sa^ ® cLpJ=^ oi'^ 2 G ® 

o^ooooPwtH>H 8WSS« 

—H OT 

•—4 


<v 

a 

o 

3 


mS 

< 

OS 

H 

Iz; 

H 

o 

n 

3 

o 

GO 

Q 

o 

iz; 

•< 

» 

H 

o 

CQ 


a 

3 

CO) 

a a 

as 


p 

o 

•w 
bfl 
p 

A 

CO 

3 

p^ 

o .. 

3 

P '2 

a 3 


•o 


« • 
® 
fc .1 


® 

33 
> 

§- 

CO 


® 


3.2 

4^ a 

s § 


2 

I 


^ U O ® o 3 

^ aJ-a o 


ssg 

OMj 


3 

S hJ-P p 

IS«:Sd®S 

O ® ^ ti v o w 
fe aj PrN ® 5 ® 

2 s^-p a ® 
Zaa >^a<00 

£0 


90 


1 , 382 































































































































































































^ r>- 

c^o irT 

^ CO 


kO 

C^ CO 

tC 
CO C4 »-t 


<Deoi-''^t>» 
cq 05 O 
C5 »0 O CO 

CO coco'co o" 

^ »OCO 


«o »o r>.fo 

CO i-< O 
CO t>* CO 

00 Tt^u? <«(j7 

^ o ^ ^ 


05O00«C^C0C0C^ 

t'-i-HC005i-(COt^05 

C005c0t^00»-'’«j< 


^05^g<55 


CO Tj< 
C4 


05 

CO 


rf< 00 
CO 00 


t^co 

CO 

05 to 

•s «» 

00 to 
CO »-* 


^ 00 
05 x}< 
CO O 

1 

i 

1 

1 

CO O 
ooo 
XX eo 

< 

1 

I 

1 

to 

XX 

CO 


1 1 

1 xH 1 

cO 1 

tto 

• to 

• 00 

lO 

>05 

•CO 

Oxxoob-^tototo 

t>-O500COC0C0xX4O 

COxJ<xXxj«eOOOCOO 

to to 

05 CO 
05 XX 

040 

1 

1 

• 

050 

1 

1 

1 


1 

t CO 1 

1 xH 1 

1 1 

■ Vk 

>05 

i 

1 

I 

1 

( 

orcd'’^to'<D'<^»do 
C^xxeO^txOcoto 
co-^ ^ 

CO CO 

coo 

xX 


TJ< 00 


eo o 

1 

to 


1 I 

1 to 

>o 

C4xxeC<OC4OtOCi0 

to to 


1 

O 00 

1 



1 XX 1 

1 to 

*<05 

tx00050xxrN.,-xco 

<95 CO 

CO O 

1 

1 

xx eo 

1 

1 

CO 

1 

1 

■ O 1 
« • 

>00 

• eo 

too’^ocoo5eotx 

05 xX 

d o 

1 

05 o' 

1 

•% 

tx 


iCO 1 

1 •* 
>05 

t m 

1 xii 

tx' o xx CO tx td 00 

CO CO 


1 

rt< 

• 

04 


» xH 1 

1 

* 

OOxXtxiOOCOCOxx 

CO CO 


w b- oo CO to 

00 <05 to CO 
<£5 00 lO C<l 1-I 

oTco^'tOiooo 




toco 


to OO »-' »0 to 
*-< 05 CO t>- to 

to <o t>- C<l 
to'co t-To 

I-H CO 05 t^ 
CO 1-H 


CO 

wM 

00 

CO 


r-^ i-H ^ 


ill III 1 t 1 1 ( i 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II 
III III 1 1 1 1 1 till 1 i 1 1 t 1 1 1 II 
III III 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 II 
III III 1 1 1 1 1 III! 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 II 
III III 1 1 1 1 I 1111 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 II 
III III 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 < 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II 
III III 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 II 
III III 1 I 1 1 1 (III 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 II 
III III 1 1 1 1 1 till 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I II 
III III 1 1 1 1 1 till 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 II 
III III 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 • 1 1 1 II 
III III 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II 
III III 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 II 

III III I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 ( 1 II 
III III 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II 
III III 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 II 
III III 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 II 
III ill 1 1 1 1 1 till 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I II 
III III 1 1 1 1 1 till 1 1 1 I I 1 1 I II 
III III 1 1 1 1 1 till 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I II 
III III 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 II 
III III 1 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I II 
III III 1 I 1 1 1 till 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I II 
III III I 1 t 1 1 till 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 II 
III III 1 I 1 1 1 till 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 II 
III III 1 1 i 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 II 

1 1 i 

1 1 I 

1 1 I 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 I 1 1 1 

1 I 1 

Oil! 

III 1 1 

1 1 1 CO 04 10 < 

1 

CO 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 I 

Oil! 

1 1 10 tx 10 1 

CD 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

O < 1 1 

1 1 1 tx O IO ' 

114 1 1 

rf« 1 

j 

lit 

1 1 1 

III 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 
till! 

will 

tx 1 1 1 

• 1 1 w ' w * 

1 I 1 to to 1 o > 

w < 

xX 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 I 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

t 1 I 

1 I 1 

1 I 1 

1 I 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 I 

1 1 1 1 1 

I 1 1 1 1 

1 t 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 t I 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

III tx 1 eo 1 

1 1 1 04 ■ 1 

III 1 1 

III 1 1 

III 1 1 

III 1 1 

III i 1 

04 1 

1 

1 

1 

• 

1 

1 

04 CO xX 

1 t 

1 100 

O tx 00 00 

OOCO O xH 

1 

^ O lOO^^ 

<95 CO 

to 00 

1 1 tx 

04 O 0> XX to 

CO to CO o 

00 00 ^ 

<95 O tx X!t< 1 04 tx V»( 

xx eo 

00 to 05 

■ 1 05 

1 1 

to O tx CO O 

OO tx CD 00 1 to 05 CO 

CD 05 

00 04 05 

1 1 «» 

1 I xX 

t^ tJ 00 00 

t^CD^cd 

00 05tdo iCDCOxX 

OxcDcOtO lOO'^CD 

<95 OO’ 

CO 

1 1 xH 

CO xX 00 xX 

xX 04 

CD to 

1 1 
t 1 

1 1 
* 1 

1 1 

1 1 


CO ^ xX 1 xX 

.K 1 

04 j 

1 




04 CO XX 

1 1 

1 lOO 

O xj< tx 00 00 

00 CD O XX 

tOxX<39C004C0^to 

04 CO 

to 00 

1 1 tx 

04 O <95 XX kO 

CO to CO O 

<050tx.«tf<tx04txxj< 

00 CO 

00 to 05 

1 105 

to O tx CO o 

00 00 04 

00txCD»OO»O<95C0 

O C5 

00 04 05 

1 1 

1 1 xx 

t.^>vt^o6od 

w w w » 

^ CD ’t*<CO 

OOO^toeOiOCDCOxx 

XX 00 

05 55 

CO 

I 1 xX 

CO xX X xX 

04 04 

O4cDCDtOtx00txCD 

1 1 


CO xH 04 xX 

xx 


i 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 I 

1 1 



of 


eo xx xH 

CO O GO 

to ^ tx 04 CO 

00 xX o xX 

tx04tOCO’^C0O5C0 

tx op 
tx 25 

CO <0 00 
to O <95 

O CC tx 

CO 0<35 CO to 

CO XX CO 05 

CD<»txxj<00O500xX 

XX CO <95 

xx o tx CO O 

00 CO 00 00 

.^tx,-xiOCO-^C4xx 

o o 

» ^ «k 

XX 04 05 
xH tx 

•k 

05 O xX 
^ XX 

to ^ t.^ Vj< 00 

CD XX coco 

W W W W 

^ CD ^ O 

W CO XX 

CDCOCDtxo6’^05Q 

xxooeootxC^co® 

(-ixx04C0050404xx 

op to* 

04 04 

CO XX 


CO 


o 

CO 

00 

^"4 

CD 

05 

rx 

tx 

00 

CO 

to 

rf< 

CD 

tx 


CO 

04 

CO 

04 

CD 


04 

to 





CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CD 

05 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CD 

tx 


<95 


05 

xx 

xf< 

<95 

CO 

CD 

o 

XX 

xH 

05 

04 

CO 

CO 

XX 

CO 

o 

to 

00 

tx 

05 

XX 

00 

to 


00 

CD 

to 

CO 

CO 

to 

Tjt 

CD 

O 

CD 

ed 

w 

CO 

w 

cd 

w 

o 

of 

of 

04 

CO* 

cf 

00 

cd 

m 

o 

p 

to 

o 

cd 

O 

cd 

W 

tx 

•td 

CO* 

00* 

m 

tx 

cf 

to 

o 



tx 

04 

o 

04 

05 

05 

CO 


CO 

04 

04 

to 


CD 

04 

tx 

04 

o 

CD 

05 



xX 



xX 

xX 



»x 



CO 

04 

04 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

CO 

xX 
















cd 

fX 



«k 







o ® 

^ CO 

“1 

4>» CO 
eo ca 

o s 

3 

o 


a 

o 

CO 

<0 

Im 

co 

x: 

o 

♦ • 
CO 

a 


o 

Sx 

o3 


05 

o 
0[g 

§ 


05 eo C5 

^ ' »-x 

*Q rz3 

> a> 

O « M 
fl « 


.a 

tx 

o 


00 

cO 




SIX'S 3 


fl 

af 

o P 


P.2 


p 
c 

OjO 
p 

p 
p 

w 

• « 

CO 

p 
bJ5 

vja 


'p 
P <35 

S'^ 

o S § 

cO 


p 


cO^oOP’PO'^O 
SQWfeWcB-SlZiWP^ 

b< > 




• m 

a 

B 

a 

o 


CO 
<35 

^—. 
Wit3 

p p 

CO^ 

O cO 

h30 


o 

C5 

a ' 

>? I •— 

g bfl P 

3 05 C5 CO 

‘X ^ 
coPP^ 

b P P 

C3 03 
OiCQCQ 


05 “ 

> 9^ 

05 ., 

o 

CD bJ3 

'P p 


eo 

20 
o 

C5 


P flCO P 03 S 
g 05-05 

g as-st»0H 

^ 05 03 

OOP^ 


09 

p 

03 

lx 

05 

05 

> 


'p 

CO 

*o 

p 

03 

Vx 

05 

a 

<35 

lx 

♦ • 

eoto g 

CO CO P 
<35 <95 S 
xX 1«H 


p p 
p p 

'p'p 

05 05 
x-» 

03 c3 


p p 

♦■X .xx 

X^ x>d 

o o 

:z;^ 


'p 

p 

03 

XJ 

^ x^ 

S-’S 

•■X W 

'p o 

to 

C5 CO 
'p 0> 

S CO 

p"® 

i-hPh 


p 

o 

••X 

x^ 

03 

05 

a 

o 


a 

<v 

'p 

o 

p 

CO 

a 

05 


a» 

.P 


PJ 

P 

03 


05 

.P 

x^ 

O 

>» 

lx 

O 


lx 

05 


05 

x^ 

,2 

lx 

43 

05 

• mm 

J3 

& 

eo 

05 

ix 

P 

CuO 


CO 

05 

hx 

cO 


P 

a 

Xi 

p^ _ 

_ <35 CO 

-P '*-* r2 

« 2.2 

OS P lx 

05 <35 

^ O X-9 

P O 08 

♦nh rt 

.p 05 P 

^ CO ^ 

^ X ® OO 

P<J •- O 

• o 

.9 S*.§ 

0*xX 

s:a 

S 9 oS 
2'^'p ^ 

©•P 03 fl >» 

43-«vx ” 

t:o^ 

.2 P CO 

o 


P 

05 

a 

a 

•^^ 

p 

p 

<35 


-P 

C5 

C5 

o 


CO 

."X 

CO 

<a 

43 


P 

O 

T? 

05 

lx 

05 

x.» 

CO 


a 

'p 

_ 50 

as w 
P 
as 


05 


P 

05 


05 


CO © 

p > 
•xi w cO o 


Ix 

lx 

05 


as 


lx 

o 


CO 


p 

O lx M 

CO bX) „ 

'H 05 o g 




co<^ 


ax-3 fx 

CO ^ .- 

0^43 


&•§ 


©Ti a u o 

CO P W ghH 

- ^r. 


<3\ 


Q 

k. 

P 

Q 

lO 

k 

Z 

9\ 

s 

s 

o 

k. 

k. 

Q 

S 

P 

k. 

"P 

■§ 

•i^ 

CJ 

S' 

k. 

z 

z 

«D 

s 

• ita 

z 

tm 

P 

z 

p 

g 

z 

p 

4x5 

Vi 

•tti 

Vi 

Vi 

P 

g 

4x5 

P 

•M 

k. 

Ox 

"P 

z 

p 

g 

•iw 




to 

C4 

CO 

04 

<X> 

CO 

05 

to 

04 

O 

CD 

to 

CD 

05 





<30 

CO 

to 


04 

CO 

to 

CD 



•*J< 

05 

eo 

xX 

<5 

05 

© 

(0 

00 

to 

CD 

CD 


CD 

04 

05 

04 

to 

CO 

CD 

rX 

00 

CO 


as 

> 

Vi 

p 

a 

of 

s 

pi 

tx 

00 

•k 

05 

tx 

04 

* 

S3 

m 

<95 

to 

?x 

S 

cd 

05 

CD 

00*0 

05 

of 

to 

of 

04 

CD 

tf 

CD 


pk 

o 

CO 


u 

a 

p 

to 



































CO 

P 

P 

P 

Vx 

© 

s 

p 

a 


S 

§ 

x-» 

CO 

eo 

S3 

O 

•M 

s 

p 

a 


CO 

05 

a 

>* 


as 

•4M 

O 

05 

a 

OQ 


43 

■^P 

2.S 

S3 


tx 

CD 

CD to 04 CD 00 
O CO tx P o 

txO XX p TJ< 

§ 

C40tOCDCD04 04xXTr 
COCDtxxflxH^txOO 
xXxXiOOcD05xJ<00xX 

w 

Tjt 

CO 

<N 

04 

Pk Pk 

COCO 

cd-^*<d‘cD*C4* tdof xx cd XX 

xX 

of 






^ ® a 

O 05 05 
X3 *-• 
P p2 

•< a43 

05 O 

P 


o 

o 

<95 

co" 

o 

?f 


tx eo ^ CO 
o to O oi cc 
05 00 0^00 


tC05COOOxx.-f^txoO 

‘OCO»-xoOO*-<cO<3>»-xtO 


1-x c-1 eo 05 *-< 

CO CC 05 ’■H 


c<icocooi-xc^oocoeoco 

COC^OCC^05tr5 tOO« 
GO I-H 


© 

to 

• 

1 





® fl 

bii E 

05 

1 





tx 

1 





<3 ® 

w 

00 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

« 


P.2 

XX 

to 

04 

1 

1 


1 

1 



w 

O 

t-H 

1 

1 

1 


1 

1 




1 

1 






xHOC<cOf-HOirxiO'^05 

050i-'05»oc0t0000 

tx,-t00t^<30»OC0i-x00G0 

.-J'cf ol'to CO cTc^00 00 

CO CO f-< »-< »H 


as 

x-» 

o 


05 

CO 

cc 

«x 

o 

to 

lO 

s 


CO »-H 05 O CO 
oo5rxcot^ 
|x 00 eo CO 


00<O5i-^C?tC0OCCC^C^’^ 

^01C0C0Ot0i-<C3C0<95 

tOCO^C^0501»-<tOt^'^ 




s 


00 00 o o 00 'tf 53 o •« CO 
CCO*H ^ to CO CO to XH O XH CO 

^ T-X xH xH 


as 

u 

(35 

p m 

5K w 

. © 
kx Ix 

© tJO 

P o 

a **" 

ga 

eo44 
be ^ 

P 9 

Ix 

as 

a 


Wp -.X* 

fsfS 

2 05 


— « 9 

•S'S § 

^ g lx 

PlPta 
U> O 

J-** lx 

a 


© 

*05 

Ix 

s 

Ix 

05 

p 

© 

o 


^Hx 
Ix © 

033 

^2 


•M 

CO 

00 

o 

o 

oT 


04 ’pi 

1 xX O 

1 CD 

1 

» 

1 xt< 

• o 

t 

CD xX 

•txO 

i xX 



i04 

<o 


04 xX 

1 txO 

4 

• CD 

1 

a 

1 

• tx 

• 

■ O 
• 

• o 

1 

t’fof 

Pk «k 

Itxp 

• OO 

• w 

■ 04 

w 

1 

■ pk 

• <95 

1 Pk 

* Pk 

1 xX 

tx CO 

t 



1 o 

• CO 

CO XH 

1 to »-x 

1 



1 xX 

1 

1 


S.2 

k-P 

Ix 




CO 

CO 

to 

CO*" 

to 

$ 


XH XX 05 CO 

rxocooooo 

05 CO CO tx 00 


rxtx00tO00CO00txt>.O5 

<30050»OOC^OOCOCCOO 

05-^«COCOxXCOxHtOCO 


■Xj< CO O 
xXtx.06O5O5 
corxC^ xH 


tO-rl^OOOCOMC^ICxIMOO 

C^COCOOO^XXOO'^OCO 

COC^tOtOO)<^'tt404t» 

cd 



to 

CO to 05 xf< tx 

txCOOOtOOOOCOtxrxC5 


04 

eo<95 00 txoo 

OOxxOtOOiOOOCOCDCO 



04 XX CO *^00 

O5xH00CDCO00CCxxtOCD 

© 

• V 

Pk 

05 

04 ededoo lx 

»d't’fcrcdcdx-oro404of 



05 xX OO 05 05 

04C0C000xjiC400txOai 

w 

CO 

Pk 

CD <95 04 CD xX 

CD04tOtO04tO-^04tx 

Pk 


s 


CD 


€i^ 




as 

x-» 

o 


M* 

05 

CO 




eocooOTf* CO 
CO 00 <0 O CO 
05 CO t'x CO 

^odoTxx" td 
eo h- xx o x-t 
t'-O5CO0CCS 


tOC^O5t.xCO00x-<O5<05CO 

CO'«t'OaOxxoOtO-^CO 

»Otx0500C<xX40CDCOxx 

•xiTidocdofcd'^c^rodccr 

txoico'^ocooooorxco 

tococoococotoc^rxxx 


XX © 


o-^ p >S 

p 


05 

tx. 

CO 

05“ 

C<J 

00 

•t 

tx. 

xX 


OO 05 OC'^ ^ 
CO CO xx CO <» 
Xj< o •''C< to 05 


•^i>xxxtx05cor^oooo^ 

<050CO<NtOOCOI-xtOl>- 

t-t-d-^tCOOCO-^COCO 


C5 OC CO O to 

to o CO eo 
«c4xJ<05 03 


O«-xJ«xxO0'^Cxxxtx.O0C< 

tx.txii000105t0a00b- 

c^cotxtxeococONooxx 

00 


p 

p 

03 

«k 

© 

eo 

co^ 

xT as 

9 © 
3 g 

eo ® 

> 9 

*xx 05 

P43 

as 

& 

o 

© 

o 


Ix 


p fj 


s 

o 


I 

p 

03 © 3 eo 

W - XJ > 49 x^ 

Tx aS±?i 2 ^ © ' fl 

g££«Wogg--5«a 

-npt^^^^43-e©p«bu 


© 

^ ^ ^ 
© 

p. 


gp > 

Pt.2 


V 

tx 

s 

p 

© 


gm 

^ 43-*^ © Qxx ^ ^ 

S S S o § o 2 03'3 cc b 

paw:z;:z; g |ffl«aaH3h^i-3Slz:!2 

S 03 © 

5 


© © 


452436®—42 


■7 


91 


See footnotes at end of table. 


































































































































































































'C 

? 

c 

• M 

c 

0 

u 

I 

Os 


u 

Q 

Z 

c 

k. 


Vi 


2 

tt 

C 

k. 

c; 

K, 

0 

g 

Q 

k 

•k* 

S' 

k 

•0 

C 

2 

cc 

tic 

Z 

•m 

e 

k 

0 

"0 

e 

e 

z 

S 

Vi 

•M 

Vi 

Vi 

Q 

0 

k 

• m 

k 

a, 

•t! 

C 

Q 

k 


«^ 
a, 

'c^ 

kd 

St 

«» 

M 

c 

2 

I 

3 

Ji 

!2 

a 

H 


a>«e> 

"S 

•C« 

i:5 


O>opt>- 

CO ^ 1-* 
^ 

«Dcft>r 

o»-^co 

t-t lO 


SSo 

CO 00 ^ 


05C51CC4«OCO’^00> 

iOl'-CJh-COu5iOiOCO 

iftCOO-^t^^OO^ 


C^Oit^Tf*t-<COI>-«-'COOOtN. 

iO»-«OOiOOiC^COQ*-iO> 

CO«0<0'^Tt<40C^^»OOS»0 


S o ^ 
QQCO 


ggs 


COi-*»OOTf»'^^ ^ 
CO O O ‘ft 

W5 W ^ 

•k 

«o 


00t^C0OM‘C0«Ch>-t;^C^«0 

c^-^iot^oO'^c^coO'«j<eo 

^ <o ^ ‘ 


© © 

«*** X 
xco 

© bn X ©o 

n © ■*** r-p © 
O ■*** t>- 04 X 

x o 

283 

© ^ ^ 

X s s 

'^X©Q04 
© X © © © 
Xt''*'*#*040 

© rn o 
Q 

^ t'p © 

x’"©*', 

O © 4 

cd'©'‘04 © ^ 
© 04 *H X X 
04 04 

^ CO 
04 04 

© x’ © 

X X 

X o ecT^f-r 
© -^X 04 

5S2 

•4k H 

© 







o 

o 

a 

03 

•4^ 

w 

w 

CO 

03 

o 

s 

s 

a 

•m 

o 

CO 

a> 

& 


03 

•M 

o 

0> 

c. 

OQ 


o a 

■**—H 

'oS 


ss 

t-o 


CD h- O 

00 o 

IftOCO 


^ ^ lO o 
iC O *-'«—' cc 
CO CC Oi 


^ o kft Aft 


s s 


CO Dl 


ii X 
•*** © 

X n 

1 

1 

1 

1 



1 

1 

1 

X 
l!^ ^ 
01^ 

x'‘o^ 
© © 

Ik 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 



1 

1 

1 

1 

CO<S 
X 1-* 


fHCOO 
^ ^ w 
^ CO CO 

QO'^Cf 


o c 
o S o 

•4->»Q »H 

flS 
0 ? rz3 

-< C.JS 
© u 
T? 


CO CO 0& 
CO 

»-« O 00 

00 CO o 
CO 00$ 


o> 

CO Dl OC’ 

^ 

CO-^Df 

CO 

C^ C^ i-» 


‘CoocoTj‘r^iooiC^ 

^oo‘ftcr‘io‘0*-H'^»o 

oOO>OC^OOe*-'^l^ 

•"n’t-Tcfc^—TcDcocood' 

‘ftCO»-'00‘ftC^‘OCOOS 
CO CO 1-^ 

cT 


CJOOC^OOOSOOOCTj'Ot'- 

0>-^C0C0f-HX00C0Oi-HC^ 

COCOOOCOCOOJOi'^COOOCO 

CO‘ft i>r Q oT 00 of dT -Tc^ 

•>itir«'«^'iftiftCOC^COI^COt^ 
O*^ r-iwH 


ooo 

.~4TJ< 

00 t>. 
CO f-H 


>-H Ci o *0 

8 (M O $ CO 
X O 00 CO 

lOCsfo ift 

^ ^ ^ 


Tt< o 

QO Tf< 
00 CO 

ss 


X<N o 

o 

coco^ 


t>.CDCO coo 

^ -"ij* X Oi ^ 
CO •-* c^ 


xw t^raTxi^c^ 

1-H •-< X X 05 

^ ^ rH *H 


c^ xc^ 

I-H X 

^ 





C5 

bjo 

P 

cC 

cO 

1 

CO 

O 

CO 

% 


oco 
X X 
Xl>- 

^*“co 


t'-ift'^OicOQCp-^C^ 

COXXX’-«2>$cOt^ 

b»i-*OC4XC^*-HXO 


ift o o XX 
C^ ^ ^ Ift 


05 05 i-< X 
^ ^ ^ CO 
OI 


tft050 
1-H ^ CO 

^ 1-1 w 

‘ftC* 


08 

<4-5 

o 


X X 05 

lOX*^ 

t^oox 

‘ft h^O 
^05$ 


lfti-« Q 

Ift X o 

X ‘ft 


^cOiftt-OC^C^Xi—' 
0‘ft-^cpX’T‘gOO 


05 05 b- CO X X 


X 


C^XC5X05050X'«^«05t^ 

OS-^^XX^XXXOi-HCI 

XC0XXX0505'^C0XC0 


Xo8o 5 
c4 Ol *-i 


C0t>gj^b»x^0505 


t'-05 
ift 


<4)4 to t>. 

X X 
CO 




X‘fth-005X'MC^'it’^C^ 

i^n^^iOiOCOOIXt^Xh- 

o ^ 


It © 
©'4k 

n © 

oSc 
ox c 

O © © 

5 © X 
oxx 

X X 
© © 
© t>- 

X 04 Q 
•»k "Ik © 
© X ^ 

fi. © © © o 

^ Ik X © 1-H 
X 1-104 Fp 04 

04 © © 
04 04 04 
n © © 

CO 04" 
Xfi. 
© 

© 04 © ©•*)* 
pH 1-4 ^ 04 *'^ 

cd X 
© X 


t'''^©o^t'.r© 

^X04X© 
^ i-H ^ pH 

o i>rpH 

S?32 









CO 

'V 

a 

D 

o 

3 

s 

Ck 


03 

& 

TS 

© 


CO 

a 

ce 

&b 

o 

tM 

a 


© 

'C 

a 

D 

CO 

ti£ b 

fl o 

a 




•4i^ <Q © 

•§‘2‘^S 

p © >»^ 


■3^ s 

r O” C3 
^ b k 

Sk 


<9 

v« 

© 

3 


c: 

fe 

Q 

© 

o 


^ 2 

o;:^ 


o 

X 

X 

O © X 
© © t^- 
t>* X 04 

OpH©cOXO'phOp© 

o*-'r-i--ot^-©o-i-' 

eoco©©xXi-t'4k© 

1 r 

1 ' X o 

1 1^0 

1 * X 1-H 

4 

■ 



1 

1 pH 

(X 

I© 

V 

i 

■ 

1 

1 

1 

A 

V 

1 

1 

1 

i 

« 

t 

1 

1 

4 

1 

1 

1 

i 

• 

1 

1 

1 

4 

* 

1 

« 

( 

1 

1 

• 

ox 

© 14k 

X X 

1 ti* 04 
» © X 
' 04 ‘ft 

o 

X 

x" 

© 

© x'c 
© 

•^cdcdX00©O4’'04'of 

i-'©XO©04'4k'^ 

Ik *-4 © © 

I * kh 

• 1 © 1l 

i 1 tip 

1 1 1-H 

1 



1© 

1© 

1 

1 

1 

1 

• 

1 

1 

■ 

1 

1 

1 

# 

• 

1 

1 

1 

i 

1 

i 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

s 

1 ‘ft'l*^ 

1 

1 

c> 

X 

X 


05 

o 

•« 

X 

cs 

40 


C^ 40 
04 1-1 
04 CO 

oTco 
OI X 


X 


Is 

•t^ 0) 

k 


05 CO 05 
1-H CO $ 
X CO 05 

00 O-Tuf 
X O 50 
XOI 04 


X O ti- 
©XX 
0004 

•4k'k‘ft©XQXX© 

©xxri*©©©©o 

©©©XXXX'^00'^^ 

’kX^©Xti*04»ftOC^CS 

XX©O404X'4k©h-^ti* 

•k 04 
k* © 

H©Xl—ltl*'4kti*©tl- 

© X 

COti^ik 

tip©c >0 

cd'4kcdk“ftX04i-ii-i 
ph©cOpH 04040XX 
*-• © © X ti* X 1—t <N 

©G>cdt''^pH04’'4kXt''^004 

XXX'kO^X©©*'^ 

04 04C^XtipnC4© 

04"‘ft 

©CC 

4k *4#* 04 

X 

rH 

CO CC 04" 

04 

CC 


fN. 04 04 I-H O 
X X X 05 O 
O- 1~» CO C-X 

Gr-Tj4"x''‘ft'*^*‘ 

X CO tft 05 
04 kH 00 40 


005 

S t^ 
X 


c?S s 


X05X 
T)4 CO 
05 tftX 


‘ft o- 

o<»x 


1^05 04 0-04 
‘ft$05 0 0«. 
05 X o- o* 

0$X04 0- 

X r»« 04 4ft 1«J< 


Xl>» X 
1-H ^ 05 

xo6i-h 
04 -1^ 04 




05 CO 05 
^ CO 04 
X CO X 

38 S 2 

XC4X 


X 40 ift 
ift l-H 
X 05 tft 

X cft'iiJ‘ 
TT X 
■4^ CO X 


^‘ft^^l-Ht'-^lftCO 
05 051—<05C0X^f^’—* 
'^044ftt-OX050X 


‘ftC35^XXXC0«^O5Tf4^ 

<^eococoxr'«04^xo404 

XXXX04X'4it<05CO*^»‘0- 


O I-I X 

X © O- ^. _. - - , 

I-IO oxxx»-< 


8340 O'* 


^S2 


^ 04 X1-^ 


05©1-4X^04'4)4 

XC0X'«^’Oi-'06 04 -. . . 

04 c5 X O* 04 04 Ift 

04 


^ 04 

csTcft 

Oi X 
X 

c6 


ts.C4 C4 ^ 

xxg© 


© '4C< 

s:2 


t'-x 


X ‘ft'^ 
^ 4ft 05 
X 40 


SSj 

o- 

3C^* 


X 


X CO ‘ft 
k#i CO 
© XX 


©© 
04 X 


s' 


t>. © ^ r-»04 
CO © ©O t>* 
04 x©t^0- 

©’‘04‘cO'9<‘ 
_ © © 04 O'* 
O* ts,4ft ^ 




S 04 ^ 
© X 
■^tl*© 

f-Tx^ 
^ CD i-< 
X»ft04 


«9 

<*•» 


04 © X 
t'»©C>* 

o^© 

'Hf'cft o 
*ai o 
© X 11^ 


cc © © X 11 © X i-H-^ © X 

14 0*— © © ift © © © © © t'* X 

04^0 04 04X »-4 X''C'X W 



t::*©r^ri*i-H©©xx 
0 '‘J'©©t>-X^©X 
X© X TJ1 O--© X ntf* 

^ §s 


t^r*©i-H04 04 x 04XXi-H 
'■|X©0©©0©©’^'© 
•^©t'*©X’^X04 04X 

eftcO©od'©iriCr<C04 04‘»ft 
©040X©0-X04©XX 
i-h©*^X04'^04XX© 

^ kk 

XK 



X^04©'4)4 


© 


•Tt< 


K ©x 

©CO 
‘ft ccfcfti-ror 

i52gS2 


x o 

© X 

x^ 

©cd* 

S5S 


© X © 
©X © 

© 1—< "Ik 
iTut* iT 

©xo 


X<PX 

X©© 


"'‘f* © t-*. X 04 

x*^ 

© © 

04*“ 05 ^ CO 
© 04 ©CO ri. 
rH © X© © 

CO 


^ t'*© 
X 1-H © 

©•^x 


^ Q 

08 


CP «« 

w 


Ss §•- o 

M 1 k ri 

o. 0.42 


w t>. © 

oo3 S 

© X 
© 1-t -vtl 
O'***© 




04 04 © 

S82 


t'-O'^fOO't^OX© 

1-HXXX040^1-|© 

0©*-H©©X©©X 


© © X 

^ 14 © 

X 04 © 
04 


^ _,xh:.©o^xx 
04©C©i-«X©*ftX 


. C © i-« X © 
*ki-H*-iX©0©^ 


© 


© 


1^ n 


© 

X 

8 

X 

© 

© 

© 

2 

© 

© 

o 

X 

X 

04 

8 

to 

X 

•k 

^ X 
^ X 

X 

© 

X 

04 

© 

04 

8 

•k 

€!5 

© 

•k 

O 

© 

iO 

rH 

04 

04 

© 

© 

X 

X 


xxk 

X © Op 

© 


X 


© 

© 

© 

X 

tip 


© 

©© 

Op 

•4k 

•k 

© 

O 

© 

tip 

© 

04 

o 

© 

X 

XOpO 

00 

■k 

fi- 

s 

g 

s: 

X 

•k 

X 

© 

X 

© 

8 

© 

04 

rH 

tCtiT 
X © 

rH 

rH 

04 © 
04 © 

O* 

04 

2 

CD 

© 

04*^ 

© 

©" 

X 

fiT 

X 

s 

o" 

X 

o" 


•» r 

0 © 
‘S 



© 

C4 

X 

X 

o 

X 

•4k 

© 

tip 

rH 

X 


o 

© 

K 

X 


rH 

rH 

© 

© 

© CJ 

W Sp*» 

5 © 







X 

CC 




rH 



rH 








CC 





o^© 

X © © 
© ^ CO 

s'SS 

© X © 


a 

08 

D 

00 

TO- 


a S 

.2 ^ 
« « 
•*'* ^ 

> s 

—. CO 
T3^ 

iC 

p. 

c3 

8 

o 


s 


o 

o 


11 


z 

*< 

CS 

z 

w 

H 



■ \ 
t , 

Q 

• 

TJ 

j ' 



5S 

S5 

fl 

* Q 

< 

C 

*•9 

P 

1 NH 

t 'P 

13 

PH 

H 

H 

o 

C 

1 ^ 

' © 

1 k 

» 

1-4 

1 

:ph 

P 

co'O 

J.. 

P 


o 

CO 

9 

J3 

o 

03 

CO 

§ 


3 <»'2 

c» 2 
b£ QJ ^ 

•gg« 

a|> ® 

colS-o 

A 

01 


§;«<«§ 


o 

3 


CO 

PI 

3 


k 

<x> ® 

‘3 


*“S 

O <D 

^2; Is 


bjo*^ 
C3 « 


eo*S 

k P 
o ca 
» C8i<9 > 
•Sort 


a 

o 

S-fl k 
P a> o 


CO 

a>. 


CO 

p-gfj 

bO 

o3 

'O 


S8fd 


•D 

t: 
. 83 
p« 


^•9 


I 

CO 

a> 


p 

H 

z 

o 


Pi 

o 

Is 


o 


-. s ^ ^ l-i g s^-s g §3| j gs 

« £>i5 3 ® o;2 o o o.p-c-93-2 § 

p<1<1«OW»?£fkP4W^ 


.®.52'd^ 
© go fl P 

*E:g S'PQtq 

© 


p 


IS 

§.S..S«.2«£: 

•ki-asPt-f^kk 

©t^ 

CftH 


X3 fe. § > p c O © 


Q. P •■_ 
OcQ.2 WPh 
•o 
a 


§>• 

© -k 

*S 

©D 

© o 
ccQto 

o 


08 


>4 

•P4 

o 

S5-i 0*3 

w CJJ3 y p 

w, g Q* © ^ 

§ .ce o 


CO 

'O 

•m 

a 

p 

p? 

p 


a PH 
.© 


»S M 


be*:? 


.. 

<9 05' 

«o, 

bO ^ 


□Q 


92 







































































































































































































^ fH ^ lA CO ^ to tD 

CO C^ 0> O »0 Os •-• 05 

i-H CO to 1 -^ r-c 00 »-< O ^ tx. 

otoo gc<r*^"<^joooc>rco'‘ 

*000^ f-) CO t*-t>-i-H c^ 


ocoo*-^ 

osSS s 
sjgfss 

CO 


S§Sfe 

C^ CO o 

goTCO oo" 
OS woo 
w "^CO 


w »C OS 
CO UO b- to 
OS W o 

t^rcTod 

CO CO OI 


00 O (N 


to OS w 
o g »o 
O to 

ate •» Vh 

l>- Q W Q ^ lO 
w o O 40 


g »0 OS 

geo 


to. rococo CO 

»0 f-i w ^ 


w CO g w 
g ?5 w 
w 40 o O 

wcTodod 

CO w i-H ca 


40 40 g CO 40 

g w w os 00 

cot'* o5 


« 

o 


0t^t^c^40 


oot^t^4og4oc^r'- 

;»««<NSgog 


to 

»or«- 

to -tj* 

CO w 


40*0^ CO CO O »0 w OS h»c^ 00 

osdt^ o 00 CO g oo OS 00 

i-i-i^co COgCO 00 CO wo 

tCot>^ lo’td't^cdco ^ 

00 w Is. u5 In. g CO 






h- CO 00 
00 00 
00 o •-' g 

•w *» 

ts. os O 40 
to w 


40 40 g 

S »0 40 
CO o 


“5Qgc5t>^^os40 


40 rs.co CO 
00 M OOCS 00 


o 00 g 
go-'ic* 


^ os O 40 00 40 1 -H 1 -H g 

c^gco 40 00 CO^ g w i-H40 

40 W l-H 


t;O©C0 

» • CO © 

ts CO 

< 00 

1 © © 

© © C4 

1 

1 

C4 

1 

1 

© 


1 

1 ^ 

1 

1 

1 

1 © 

CO w CO 

• 1 O 00 

© 

i © 

1 © 

00 ts ts. 00 <N 

1 

00 © 

1 

C4 


1 © 

1 

>© 

w ts mh C4 

• • © o 

^ r-t 

'© 

• © © 

w © © C 4 0 

1 

ts © 

1 



'© 

1 

1 © 

CO**«^* CS C4 

1 1 © © 

©00 

1 •. 

1 

1 . 9 * 

CO CO CO © 

1 

1 

«k 

W w 

1 

1 


1 

1 

i » 

* 

1 

1 

1 «. 
• © 

© 00 © ts 

1 I © CO 

© © 

•CD 

• CO 


1 

w ^ 

1 



• w 

1 

1 w 


40 

40 


iCO 
11 >- 
• o 


. I 

o 

CO 


g 


© 

#i> 

40 


00 

40 


0040 
O CO w 
©•^ w 

CO 




CO 


woo 00 CO 40 
ts.MCS'OQOS 

00 N h-c5 lO CO 

tC40<^c<f40 tsT 
N 00 C» WOCO 


*-H40C0 40ls- 
w CO 40 OS 
40 40ts. CO O 

ts»©C^C 0 ^© 00 O 
-icot^*^r-o©4o 
I ^ w 




oc^ 

40 00 


©©00C4OS 
rs. 'ef 00 00 
OOOIOOCOt>» 

2 Sg§S§- 

© 00 W w CO 


I © 

• CO 

• o 

I .. 

• CO 

I© 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 


w CO 05 


00 ©©ts. 00 c 0 ©wc 0 

^COOCOC^OO^OOOO 

■Ttic^e^we^oioscoc^ 

©‘tsTooTio'c^s^os'os' 
ts.©C^f-H»-HOSWCOt^ 
w CO © W 


S!t* ts © 

1 ts © 

ts CO 

1 M* 

0 © 0 

© © 04 04 04 

1 

04 ^ 

1 

© 


1 © 

1 

1 © 

04 0 ts 00 

1 1 ts 00 

© 04 

1 © 

g © CO 

00 ts ts 00 04 

1 

00 © 

1 

04 


I © 

1 

1 © 

© 00 CO 00 

• > © 0 

I 1 

TT w 

to 

1 

© © 04 

w ©© C4 0 

• 

ts © 

1 

ts 


•0 

1 

A 

1 © 

Bh 

w CO 0 ^ ^s 

* * B. 

1 ' © © 

©“od 

• © 

tsTco^'d 

04*CO CO CO© 

1 

1 

04* w* 

1 

1 

B. 

1 

1 

• t^ 

1 

1 

1 B. 

• o 

OS © 00 00 

• • 00 CO 

© © 

' © 

0 


1 

w ^ 

1 


1 

1 W 

1 

• w 


S CJOwC^eow ©© 
CO'5»©'^(»© O 
OOS CO CO w 00© 

‘•^co 40orcdodcd 

I’^COt^C^'^OS W ©00 
• c4 W 


: 00 


I 00 W W 


00 

© 

© 


00 05 O w 
CO © o ^ 
O O O CO 

rtTkc^co t>r 


ts. 

o 

•k 

o 

00 


© 

cs © 

© CO 
00 


© 


© 

a 


© 


CO 

§ 

© 

ts 

a 

• 

1 

1 

1 

• 

i 

1 

1 

g 

1 

1 

1 

I 

1 

• 0 

• 04 

1 

r 

1 

i 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

• 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

• 

f 

1 

t 

1 

00 © 
ts © 
© 

• 

• 

1 

1 

A 

. 

i 

1 

1 

j 

» 

1 

1 

1 

A 

T 

% 

1 

I 

t 

A 

1 

1 

1 

1 

A 

© 00 
^ 04 
CO 

' © CO 
• 04 06 
i©04 

• 0 

1 9^ 

•ts 

• 

1 

1 

1 

A 

ts 

ts 


04* 

ts 

1 

» 

• 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

• B. 

• 00 

1 

1 

• 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

4 

1 

1 

1 

t 

1 

1 

1 

1 

coisT 
© ^ 

1 

I 

I 

1 

1 

1 

1 

t 

1 

B. 1 

04 1 

1 

1 

1 

t 

f 

1 

t 

»- 

© 

© 

* B. ^ 

• © © 

1 ^ ts 

ijs 

1 

Bk 

© 

© 


© 




© CO 
© © 
ooo 


o © © © 00 © CO ■^ © 1 -^ ^ ts. ^ 

00 © ts. ts. CO ©©ts.© 

© © © w © OS 00 © ooco^© 


00 t«* 
© fs- 

eo 


00©’^0©©0©CO 

s^t'^wcoo©'^©© 

S(»4 CO © t*s.w Ow 


w 

o©coo 

CO © © 


© 

h« 

© 

cd 


© 

o 

•k 

© 


CO w 

oot :-1 ® 

ts. O 00 

rH© C^C^ 
^ ^ ^ C4 


CO 


w 00 © © ts- © 

OI ts. o ts- © 

© © © © w 

a« 

ts» © w © © 
Oi CO © CO ^ 


04 

a 

© © © 04 © 
©OOO cots 
w Tj* CO W © 

©CO©© 

ts © ts 

C0000 04 

CO cots©©© 
00 O©C 0 ts& 
00 00 ts 00 CO© 

§s 

ooo 

© 

CO 

B. B> B. Bk B. 

© ©CO 04 00 
©04 04 04 

B> B> BA BA 

© AM © CO 
w 00 w w. 

©s^©g*04 © 
w © 00 © w 

©© © W 

Bk Bk 

©© 




CO 



^ © 
©CO 

o © 


w © 
04 


CO CO 
© © 
© 0 

©©^rfOOtsCOw© 

cp©w©0400404© 

©©Omm©C000O04 

w ^ © © 

© © © 04 

00 CO © 0 

© © 0 © 

W ts ts t4 
w © © 0 

CO w ts 
00 ts ts 00 

ts 0 -^ © 

© ts 0 
ts © © 

© 04 CO 

© tsT 
04 ts 

od^os‘©©*co*crcrco‘ 

•^^w©MHeo^Q 0 © 

'B* CO © © .B* 04 W 

^ B. Bk Bk 

mn 0 © w 

0 © 0 © 

CO c^y © 

04 w © 

w © 04 ts’ 
^ ^ w ^ 

04 w © 

^ s 


w 00 © © t^ © 
04 04 w o ts. © 
04 © 04 © © w 


ts. 04 00 w © © 
04 CO © CO 


04 

CO 

© 

© 

04 

© 

© 

CO 

© 

© 

C? 

ts 

© 

00 

CO 

ts 

t- 

04 

© 

ts 


© 

a> 

CO 


© 

00 

© 

00 

01 

B. 

© 

00 

04 

CO 

04 

00 



© 

CO 

CO 

tH 

ts 

04 

04 

04 

00 




COWt'-©©©00© 

04cO©©©OOw© 

04e^ts.co©©©o 


© 


CO 


S ©© 
© 00 ' 
CO© 

© 


oooo© 
ts. w ®00 
© w CO 


© 


t- © 
CO 


O CO CO 
OCOC4 
00 © © 

w* 04 ©“ 

W © © 

w <o»—I 


O0wcow©0040400 

C4004e0©©©0^ 

w©e4cooo©t'."^© 


Tt* fs- © -^ .-. 

© « W CO 
© 04 


© © 04 
, . - . © W CO 
© © © 04 

04 w 


© .-• CO © 

W © ts. © 

^ W CO © 

cd'^tfJ'oTod' 

© 00 00 ts. 

CO W o © 


© © tsstt 
ts .B* w 
w © © W 

© -.»• «B* w 

00 © ts © 
04 w Tt t- 

© CO © 

ts © S 

©04© 

ts 00 00 
QOOOOO 
^ © 00 w 

© © 
© © 
© w 

04 ^ 04 
00 © CO 
ts © 04 

©©© 00 © 
© © 00 00 ts 

CO © CO w © 

© CO © -^ 

ts ts © © 
00 © 00 © 

© 04 04 w 
^ OO'^ 
04 w 

ts CO 04 CO 
© 0 'B* © 
w w CO 

© 06 ^ 
t- w © 
CO 

© © mn ©’ 
04 CO w CO 


04 ’ w’ ©■ 
w ^ CO 

06 04 CO OS 06 
ts ^ CO 

tM W 

© ts 
(s) W 


© 0 ©© 0 wi -<0 

g^sasssa 

odg'g 04’'00 ^■'oT 04* 


© © 04 ts. 1 -^ 
© ts. CO ^ © 


s 


© 
© © 


a 


t» w 


04 


W Is- 

O CO 
04 CO 00 

04*00* CO 

g oo © 

SU4 04 


CO-^O4©00©CO00CO 
©04C4COg^gw^ 


ts. © -^ W 


©CO 


©co©r'-©©©© 
©u5©©©©©oo 
00 ©COts-© ^ 

•k a^ a» 


.-I CO h- 
04 04 © O 
CO 04 © © 
. . .>. — 
W ts. © © 

o © © 

« CO © 


CO © © w 

g oo © W 
w 04 04 


W © CO CO 
•^ -^ © »-• 
04 CO ts. 


© o © 

CO T}< 

00 CO 00 


© © © -^ 00 © 
© © © © o o 
w 04 Tj* 00 © ts. 


© 04 © © 
04 w © 04 
-^ © 


© CS 4 o w 
CO ts OO 
w w 04 


« ts Tf< 
© © © 
St* 04 


ts. ts CO © 00 ^ 
^ © w © O w 


© tT © 
W CO CO 
w ts 04 

© «iB* © © © 
04 00 w © 
0 © ts ts 

t- Tt« ©© 

© ^ ts ts 

004 00 © 

©©0004CO©04w 
©©04 04Qw,-i© 
©©•^COW^©tH. 

© CO 
CO © 

coo 

© © © 
© ts ts 
04 

© 0 OS © w 

g © w © © 

CO 04 

CO © 
CO'B* 

B. Bk B. Bk B. - ^ Bk B> 

©©©tstsOi-^© 

©©©©04©»CO 

eoooco'^eo^©^ 

©04 


00 


CO 


C5 
03 

h-3^ 

QJ 

t,o 


fl o. 
Oti 

(s' P 
M 03. 


p 


CO 

p 




a 

o 

CO 


<D 

■ ■ s 

03 p-y 
.. J3 O 3 


o-sa g'S'5 Sh-s s s § 

JA oj.siJo « ao o ggw 3 J 

<!ooooOMas>* gt'iJSStf 

CO 


h9 

< 

Oi 

H 

H 

o 

n 

p 

o 

CQ 

p 

jz; 

< 

H 

5 

n 

p 

o 

OQ 


a 

s 

ta 
p 

1 

o •• 

w ea 

p-g 

pS 

B p 


^6 


i 

ja 

Cud 

S S’S 

8 »>- o ^ 

D W 03 ^ 

*3.52 O 

ppS 


P3 

> 

p 


a> 

^ "o ^ 


XU 

ca 


o 
P3 

03.52 

^■ 2.2 g § 

§gg 

OMs3 


CO 

p 

ca 

OJ 

o 


0 ) 

u 

o 

B 


•*"> *P o3 
^ p 


I 

a 


os 05 
,Si CO 


o C5 


p 

o 

4^ 

CO 

o 

Xi 

o 

a « 

03 

p 




o 


© 03 ® 
w ..-t ^ 

pa.ppa 


.a 

4.^ 

1 m 

o 


I 

o 

p 

o 


SP-( 

ca 


eo **S 


p « 

o P 

*-* g p 


03 


'O 

• s ® 

'o 0 § 
ca 

0.2 o 


Z&’^e^oo^-^S «QS£w^.9^rt« 

3gg 2 A 

Sis OiSEh Eh > 


p 

.2 

b£ 

p 

p 

p 

w 

a a 

ea 

*a 

bA 

u 


4^ 

CO 

© 


O *-w^ 
w ©T3 

• W > p 2 

do g.S '2 

Sp ” 


03 


© ceP a . „ 

’X *- ft o © p 

O oolj o 

a a-o p“ a a § 

coco g S.p'gcnE-* 

oSSi 


93 


1 See app. A for the territory included in each urban area. Figures which relate to territory other * Not initiated until 1933. 
than that shown for the area in app. A are footnoted. * Not initiated until 1935. 

* Excludes cost of administration; of materials, equipment, and other items incident to operation of «Includes direct and work relief and aid to veterans, 

work programs; and of transient care. ^ Relates to city. 

• Includes statutory aid to veterans administered on basis of need. 





































































































































































































a) cQ 

>'2 

*n 

i 5 a 


CO 

CO 

CO 

o 

o» 

oo" 

»o 


eoo>t^i-«o 

i-^ t'- OOCD 

^ 1 -H lO 


» 00 ><Dt^C^C<lrj*oOO> 0 >^h »00 

4O'^00*-<€0c0t^(N00'^O0500 

0>t«»t^iOcDCOCO»-4eoCOC^iOCO 


b- CS o 1 -' 

O O CO 
|^<0 


CDOSOSOiOOOCOC^O^^fiJC^CO 
—t ^ I>-OO ca »0 CO CO ^ 

^ ^ ^ tH 

€4“ 


C<100*-< 1-Heo f-< 

»-HC^O> IN 00 i-< CS t-^ CO 0> 00 
COC^CO CD o QO CO 0> O O O 

00000“ oTuo CO TjTooar 

O'^b- CD CO i-i CO CD 00 

00 »-t 




O»C«»OlD»O^-*J'»C00C^C^ 
1 —iCOCO^OiOOOCDt^OO 
r-ifN-O 0 b^CDC 0 CDcDTj«O 

oTo l^<o“ COCO O CO Q CO 
^CO^CDt^»-i-^»Ot^»5cO 
^ O 00 ^ 


o» t» 

CO 

t^o 

CO o 
CO CD 




CS CO 
VM CD 

«>g5 


CO 


Q 

K 

o 

Q 

>k 

2 

V5 


Q 

ll. 

k. 

a, 

K 

0 

Q 

K 

S' 

k 

c 

5 

•m 

c 

k 

o 

T3 

c 

g 

2 

Q 

4 w 

CO 

• 1 ^ 

CO 

CO 

0 

ki 

Q 

•m 

k 

a, 

"2 

c 

Q 

V 

•w 

2 

a, 

kd 

2 

2 

0 

s 

I 

vi 


2 

es 

H 


CO 

TJ 

a 

a 

t) 

2 

p 

Oh 


o 

a 

(A 

•M 

CO 

•« 

CO 

03 

CQ 


s 

a 


CO 

<» 

e 


03 

o 

03 

a 

CQ 


© 

CD 

Jp 


■*^73 


0 fl 

HH .P 



»o 

'P.Q 

04 




00t>.^O3CO 
00 f-H CO 03 »o 

.-H ^ c<noo 


CO»-HOOCOt'-^»H»DC^'^»DO> 

««i<r-l.-ICOO»D»-l'^f-Hr-C ^»0 




CO t>» 


CO’^i-HOODJ«3CO»-i^r-iCOOi 
»0 rH 


^ CO o 
N 03 
D»OCO 

r^'TjH-cD 


COt^O»OOONC<l03 

00<DcDt^cDOC0003 

t'-t^cD003D1CD<Dt^ 


*0 




CO 

03 


CO ^ N 


IN .-H 
00 
CO 

03 CO 
CD ^ 


o § § 

■*^-0 s 

ax3 

03 o 
73 


00 

03 rH CO rH 


Hfl 40 rH 04 0 

04 

00 GO rH tr 0 


rH 0^03 00 CO 

s 

40“ 

04 

^ O-CO 0 rH 
rH 


c^'^03r^.-icD*-Hooo‘De^rfoe 

i-H03CONC00030*-«C^COt^N 

t^C0i-HG0cD’-HC0i-^00O'^O3C^ 

c^t^i-T r^o co‘c4‘»c'oo‘co‘cr»o c^ 
CO DJ 03 »0 O »0 «DC^C^0003 

03 1 -H 


0031-4 03»0 I-H d r-4 10 r- 

»0 CD 1 “^ 03 03 03 ic lO O 00 

003C^ 03 rH 03 N 00 CO 00 


.-lC^I03Tt<03C^CDi-HTHC0rH 

OO-^’^C3'^‘0OcDcD'^ 

rHCO00*-«O3t^CSCOt^O300 


03CDC0 CO CDCD CO «:>-Tj* 
wo CO CO rH »0 CO CD 

04 CO 1 -H CO Tf* rH 


C0CSC4»-(C0Tt«C0'^03-^'^ 
»OW5cDOOr-00000'*t'W5 
rH t«« lO rH 



CO CO »o 


© 

© © 
top 

00 

t 




1 

1 

03 0 rH H}< t>. <0 tr 03 04 40 rH I 

1 

1 40 

CD004OC0C0C0O-«f*00 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 


1 

1 

t 


1 



t 

i 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 



40 

1 




1 

H}1 C4 rH 03 CO 03 r-40 03 03 t 

• 03 04 

O3C0tr4OO4 4OTfC0<D 

1 


1 








1 

1 

1 

1 

t 


CO 

•k 

1 

1 

t 



1 

1 

rH 03 CO 03 03 0 03 03t'-rH CO 1 

t »o 0 

1 r r 

i040'^40 04 0440 03»0 

1 

1 










1 

1 

1 

1 

t 

1 

1 

1 



© 03 

CD 

1 




1 

CD CD 0 00 40 CD CO rH 40 CO 00 1 

lt^04 

Tfi CO 0 CO CC 03 40 CO" 

1 










1 

1 

1 

• 





1 




1 

rH t>. 0 CD 03 CO 04 CO 03 CO l 

1 40 CO 

00rHO4r>.O4trrHlN0O 

1 










1 

1 

1 

i 



*0 CO 


V. 




1 

rH rH rH ^H ^H 1 

1 

03 Tf 04 rH 

1 










1 

1 

1 

• 



b 

•s 

40 

> 

1 




1 

1 

rH 1 

t 

1 

00 

1 

I 


1 

1 

1 

r 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

t 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

t 

1 

1 

1 



© 


t 




1 

( 

i 


1 


1 








1 

« 

1 

1 




( 




1 

1 

1 

1 

1 


t 

1 










1 

t 

1 

1 

1 

i 

1 

1 




09 

■t^ 

o 


t-00 03CDt^ 
CO CD IN »0 
O CO coo 


'iJ*wOOOHjnCcD03C^03rHN'^00 

rHHt1»OOC^00303rHa3t^’^C^ 

CO^CDrHCDt'-TtlO'^TtlOOOC^ 


t- IC 
03 HJ1 CD 
»0 CD 


O003003»0rf<t-0*<t< 

Tf<CDCOiHt^ONt^iO 

COt-COCOTfit^OOOCS 


lHC^O>Tf*03C^CDlH^CPrH 

oO‘^Tr<o3‘^‘oocDO^ 

»HcooorHc33t-c^cor-0300 


CO O 03 D4 o 

^ 00 CO IH CV| 


COOOCMtOOOD4D40'<t’»D*DCOCD 
00003000’'J*03CDC^C003 
O rHC*4rHrHlNIN rH tHN 


CDOOih C4 00 CO 04 CD 03 O 00 

CDOt^ CO rH CO00 c<4 GO 04 00 
CSInfrH rH 00 CD CD 04 04 rH 

oT 


C00404r-CO'^CO"^03Tf<HP 
*D»DCD00t>»OOO00'i|J*W5 
iH o- 40 rH 04 


CO 

03 CD 0 

r- CO 

03 04 0 

Or CO 

CD CD 0 

t^CD 

co“co tfT 

CO t- 

^ rH rH 

CD 



CO 


03 

Im 
03 
73 

(ga 

03 

u* u 

9 to 


o 

a 


73 
p 
p 
t/>M 

to i- 

p o 

•S^ 

ki 

03 

K 


C073 -•«* 
-*-> ® © 
0^^<4 

2 © 


-20 

■PsS 

pui 


© 

*© 


© 

© 

p 

© 

o 


M «_■ 

ts.® 

op; 

^2 


CO 

o- 


00 

00 


4D 


40 CO 
CO 00 
40 CD 

W^IO 
40 03 
40 


04 

r- 

40 

CO' 

40 

CD 


'XJ* 

CO W5 03 

C0OCDl-H40trt-C0»0 

1 

1 

• 

• 

» 

• 

1 

1 

• 

1 W 

1 0 

0 


h-COrH 

rHC003C0rH400-O»D 

1 







1 CO 

1 04 

03 

O- 

000 03 

03CD0004000004CD 

1 

1 

• 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 0 

1 

' 00 

0 

«■ 

O- 

oThjTio 

rH0340 04-rti03C004-xt< 

1 

1 

1 

I 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 CO 

• Vs 

04“ 

rH 

^ <0 CD 

H}<04rH40'xt<rJieD03C3 

1 







• !>• 

1 b- 

*0 

03 

04 rH rH 

C0t>-04rHHSi<0OC0CD 

1 







1 rH 

1 rH 

04 


o 

04 


C4 


r\ fc- 


o 

t- 

CD 

03“ 

03 

CO 

•o" 

CO 

rH 


00 »0 rH C4 40 
O?. 04 40 40 CO 

04 Ht* o rH 

oocd“cd“oo 4“ 
03 r^ 04 00 00 
CD rH 00 CO 04 


40Tt<cDC040MirHrt<'«<400c004 

OTt<O00C003TtlCDC0iHOrH40 

O3CDlN00CDCOifO3C0rH4Ot^O3 

C£r40'cD04'’^OCro6‘co'OCDr-rc»^CO‘ 

400t-0300 00 0440 03C00340rH 
00Tt<00O3Tjic000Tt<03rHCDO00 
*» 

O rH 04 


04 CD ^ 
03 00 O 
04 40 40 


04 04C0t^C0C0rHO*rJ< 
O00t^04C04OINCDt^ 
00 03Tf400000004'^ 


•^03 03CDC0004l^COC003 
03iHCDt^O00rH0300t-O 
40C003COr-OOOOOOrH03 


00 CD ^ 

Si°'-' 


CD 


rH 04 


^0400CDOCDTt*O*O 

ooor-t-'^corHcDt- 

044OrHrHts.-^4O'*#*O3 

•s *. 

O- 00 CO rH 


04CD00C0rHCD0-03Tf'C0O 

rHHf4OC0O4Hf00t-CDrHeO 

C0COCDtHO4r-04O3CD04 

r-T 


04 rH 

CO 0 

04 0 

rH rH 00 

rH 04 

rH 03 CO 

CO 

•s 

00 ^ 04 

40 04 

04 0 x^ 

'XJ' 04 

40 CD 40 

04 

rH 

CO 




CD 

rH 

x«< 

© 

W 

HH 

0 


6 h 

o- 

04 


CO 00 rH H»4 40 
CD O »D 04 CO 
iH O- t*— 


40'^CDCD4O'^rH^Tt440OC0CD 
O’^OC0C003Tt<<000rHOrH03 
03CD04 00cDCO'^03 00iH40t>-CD 


»0 rH CO 
CD 04 04 
CO 


4004030000000C003 

lHrHCD4O'^rHO3CD04 

t'-CO»040003CD^rH 


•^03 03<0C0O04t>.HfiC003 
03rHC0WO00iH03rHr>-04 
40C003COC'-000040rHt>. 


03 04 CD CO 04 
04 CO 00 
04 00004 




CD40<D04T!fiOOOOCOO«DrHCOrH 
400t^03 00 00 04400cD0340CO 
0Cr^ic003’rf«cD00-^03iHOOt>- 


rH ?H ^ 


04 rH 


O- rH O 
rH 00 
40 04 t- 

rH CO 


CD04C000»O4O 00 04O 
Tf«rH03 04 00 00t-40t^ 
4Oe0C0C0rHO»000CD 


03 


00 rH HJ1 04 rH 
CO 


O4CD00COrH«£5t>.O3rHCO»O 

rHHt140C004Hf00r--^rHO 

COCOCDt-04t-O4rH<D't»< 

-^"40 r-T r-T 


04 rH 
iH o 
04 04 

SS3 

O- 04 
CO 


CO •««»* o 
rH rH 00 
IH 03 CD 

00 Vof 

04 O 
40 CD 40 


o 




O CD O O 04 
OO-'O'DO 

ooeo o tr 


0303i#'OOOOcDcOcD04b-*^ 
rHOOCD03<DO'^40000-»004 
C4O 00 03 04rHC340e0cDC0CD0> 


03 00 00 CO rH 03 r-CO40 CO CO 
lOcDOO CD 00 03 04 rH 04 CO 00 
CD030 O CO 00 iH 40 CD CO CO 


40rH0000404000000030 
03 04iH(NO04CD03r>.C0tr 
CDcD00401^00 04ih04iH40 


04 04 40 CD 04 
03 03 CD O 
04 04 00 IH CO 


O^OOt-COrHO’^iOiHO-t^O- 
CDiHt>-00 03 03C00300COiHC004 
0040OrHkO00OTPrH04 00 04 00 


rH rH rH 04 


04 


CO 03 04 
CO 40 
O- CD 03 

«« 

rH CO 


<^4OrHO4r-O4t^CO00 
C004COrrCD-H?Ot>-»0 
C0rH'^03 04t-C0O00 


40 00 rH Hji 40 O 
CD 03 04 rH 03 40 

CO ^ r- r- CO o- 


rH 00 

005540 


CD 


tr iH 04 rH 

*0 


»0 40 1 H 


40 40 
00 CO 
03 40 

•> k 

CO 03 
03 
CO 04 

CD“ 

CO 


04 O Q 
^ 00 
00 »0 CO 

*4 

rH 00 
rH »0 
40 CD 40 


^ o ^ 

OSpS'P 05 


tfi 


O’t^ fl 


r. S © 
^ Pk 


P 

P .«2 


00 

o 

40 

o 

03 

rH 

CO 


CO »0 r- rH IH 
•H »0 00 »H Hj* 

04 40 03 CO CO 

04 »0 CO 1 H CO 
Ht» 03 03 CO 


Hfi000t-04C4’^'^0440CD'«J«04 
t-C04OO04G0iH00 0340rr40rH 
iH00CD‘DO3O3COCDCD03»O04CO 

t^CO^00"GO 00*oT-^CD 40*iO^co'c^in’ 
t>-CD‘OCDrH4O 00 03iHO40C0r- 
40 40 04 04CD030'^04C003'V03 


iH CD 03 O 40 O rH CD »0 CD 40 40 
tr03t>. 0 CD rH t>. 05 40 40 04 CD 
03rH03 CD-^rr»0'^04 03^'^ 


iiJ*C0C040I>-CD04C0cDrHC4 

rHi040cD030CDcD40COCD 

00COTt<cOrH4OCDCOO3CDcD 


rH iH iH 40 


iH 04 ^ 


rH 00 04 
03 04 04 
03 03 Hji 

^ *4 

rnCOrH 


COOCDCOt-iHiHrHtr 

CDOC000040C040’1^« 
trCOTfG0 04 00 03iH03 

^ «4 

O 03 rH Hjl 04 1 H rH 

iH r— 


^O3O3rHO34OCO'^'^00CO 
03 04cD00cDCDe‘0C0OOC3 
40 rr 00 COCD 03 t- 

•4 «« *4 

o 00 1 H rH 


04 
04 GO 
Or 40 

k4 

r- 03 
tr 10 
CO 

o 


CD O 
00 00 CO 

03 rH ^ 

40 oToo 

04 03 

CDOOC^ 


*P 

P 

© 

•» 

o 

HH 

© 

HH 

CQ« 

P s 

c U4 
« «3 

> Q 

•rH OT 

T5,0 
O H 

•r^ rO 

Pi 

© 

o 

© 

O 


< 

tj 

o 

55 

P>^ 

Z 


© 

4H 

o 


p 

o 


ri'^ 

P p .. 

■2 ' © ® c5 

H t ^ HH 

5 73 T* M H? ■*•5 

© oPQW o w 
fe 

S'c ® © 
p«W)z;Iz; 

p 
o 

O 


pl^-- 


© 

© 

P, 


73 

(h 

<2 
73 
© 

©« 


'’'©©®^®3©©o 


g5 © 


© 
© 

p 

© 

73 

• pN 
> 
o 

kl 

73 ij .. 

© ^'2 

CP to 9 

tJ3 ©^ 
P © CO 

'C i?*"* 

kt O 

-^1 


Q 

rn 

H 

z 

H 

< 

S’ 

P 

Q 


w 


© 

'9'^Ck 


•»jO M fl ''Ob 


(m 

© 
© •*-» 

© S 

b£'^ 


© 

p 

o 

© 


CO 

ki 

© 

©^ 
o 


© 


p 

o 


CQ 


Hs 

© 

: 2 ; 


p 

© 

few & ^ ^ s© S .2 O'l.S 0-3S .© s 

^> 2 j;z;eh . <ipq;z:;z:;z:p5oqp>h 


a 
© 
C5J3 
P © 


© 

•1-3 

CO 

©. 


© 

I 

P^-P 

^ Oi b£ 

rr k< 

5^ 5 

Wr-^ © 


b/) 

P 


© 

ki 

ki 

© 

I 

CO 

© 

M 


a 

H 

O 

m 

H 

Ph 

o 

12 ; 


73 


© 


© 




p 

© 


o ca 

w rt 

0.2 •• 
• ♦ q3 

•£2 ^ Q- fl 
oQcq 

.a ^ 


ra 

> 

CO 

■§ 

> 


rtj CO 


o. 
© 
p 
© 

,— ^ 


94 


240,800 















































































































































































































CO CO 

t>. t>» 

00 

00 CO 
to 05 

CO t>. 

^ o ^ 

CO CO o 

00 05’'*<00d 

to to CO 00 
d d 00 CD 

^ ^ 

00 Hfi O 

W to T-H 

t- CO CO 

oco c5 

CO to 05 

000>»H00Odt-t0i-H 

M<rHO00t-.00C0M»05 

C005M^05005COrH05 

to d M to 

d CO OO t- 
CO M COOl 

to rH 00 00 

CO to M to 

CO 05 CO to 

t- O CO to 

CO t- O rH 

00 to 00 M 

00 05M 

CO t- M 
t- 00 d 

to 00 to b- d d 

M d CO 05 to 05 
t- CO M M CO CO 

QO CO O 

M to t- CD M 

O CD 00 fH O 

CO CO O 00 to 

to t- to M 
t— eo CO CO 
00 00 CO CO 

05 t^ 

dco 

CO 05 

»od 

05 

O kO 

O CO •tf* 

ooood d 

05 

to od 1 -f 

05 

to 

•>> A 

to 1-H to 

CD to 1 -H 

CO 05 d 

CfcOtOOr-TtOClofrH 

coddocowtocot-. 

rH Ml to 1 -H 

• 

rH 05 CO to 

05 rH 05 rH 
d d 

t— 05 d' to 
t— M CO d 
d 0005 

l-fcf C5 of 
dMCOO 

rH d 

d'oToT 

05 CO d 

d o 

at at at at at at 

CO CO fH to t— d 

MM CO 00 rH 

at at at 

O to 05 
d CO M 
rH 

at at at a^ at 

00 00 rH CO 00 
to d MOO 

rH rH 

o i-Tco ef 
»o M dco 

rH 






rH- 




r- 

a^ 





1 t 

1 1 

1 1 

1 i 

O CO 
d to 

00 CO 

• 1 t 

< 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

I 1 I 1 1 

to 1-4 05 

05 00 Ml 

CD CO CO 

00 O CO 

1-H O CO 

05 cot-. 

M^M^OOdtOOOeOCOCD 

M<OOt-.05iOCOt-t'-05 

CDCOdt-OOdCOO 

CO -H 05 CO 

CD d 05 M 
MCOOOO 

till 

1 1 1 1 

till 

1 1 t 1 

1 1 1 

II 1 CO 

1 1 1 00 

1 1 it— 

O 05 M 
to CO CO 
d 00 M 

1 I 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

I 1 t 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 I 1 

1 I I 

1 1 1 

1 1 4 

1 1 1 1 4 

1 1 1 1 1 

4 114 1 

4 1 4 1 1 

till 

4 14 1 
till 

I 1 1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 
t 1 
• 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

«« 

co»-< 

III 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 I 1 

1 1 1 

1 t I 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 I 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 I 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 I 1 

I 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

•k «< •« 

oo'*<< d 

O5’'t-rod 

05 00 
rH 

ofcdoftotcocococo 
rH t-to t-CO CO cod 

•% av 

05 OrH CD 
rH O rH 

till 

till 

till 

till 

till 

till 

1 I 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 T 

1 1 1 

I 1 1 M 

II id 

1 ! 1 

1 1 1 

I 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 I 1 

at a. at 

t- CO o 
to 

1 1 t 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 I 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

4 14 4 4 

114 11 

4 1 1 4 1 

I 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 I 1 1 

1 I 1 1 1 

1 • 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

till 
lilt 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 t 1 

1 t 1 1 

1111 

00 o 
ec 

CO d 

d 

CO 

00 ^ 

00 r- 00 

^ O CO 

CD 1-H ^-H 

Q O CO to CO 
Ot-* CO CO 
cot>-Odi-t 

to 05 CO 

1-H 00 M* 
005 00 

O CO t- 
COOMI 

o cot^ 

OOOdM^OtOtOO 

OtOrHdCOCOOOOOrH 

OCOOd05COOOrH 

CO OrH CD 
to d to CO 

05 00 to GO 

1 1 

1 1 d 00 

1 1 O M 

1 1 d CD 

05 00 1*^3 

to t— 1 M 
to 00 It- 

1 

itOM 

Itooo 

1 M O 

»0 M O 00 CO 1 
to O 05 00 d t 
O t- 00 O 05 1 

COO 1 

rH 00 1 

M M 1 

i 1 1 

d 1 >05 1 

M 1 105 t 

to 1 lOO 1 

COM ito 
COCO ICO 
to CO Ito 

ci 

eot-4 

C5 to 
coco 

•s •« 

00 00 

•Ni 

to ■«it< »-H 05 

CO to T-< 1 -H o 

^ ^ TH tH fH 

•4 

tH 

M< c4od 

^ d 1-H 

^ 

05 rH T.H 

CO cot-. 

otot-^o^-cototoo 

CDOCCCOtOt-rHCOtO 
iH d to rH tH 

COQCOCO 
t-.005 00 
rH CO 

• ' 

1 1 o to 

1 1 CO CO 

1 1 rH 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

a« 1 at 

Oco 1 o 
to to 1 <D 

1 

t 

1 

1 

I 

1 

iCOd 

1 M 
• 

1 

1 

1 

1 

I 

d M M M 00 1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

a« at 1 

dt- 1 
dCO 1 

I 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

00 1 IO 1 

d 1 Id 1 

I I 1 

1 1 1 

1 I 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 4 

1 t t 

00 'M 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 1 
• 1 

I 1 
• I 

1 1 

1 i 

1 1 

1 1 

1 I 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

>1111 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

00 CO d 
O5 00M< 
to O 1-4 

1 1 1 

I 1 1 

1 1 1 

« 1 1 

I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 I • 1 1 1 1 1 1 

I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

■ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

t 1 

CO • 00 1 

CO ' M « 

00 >05 1 

1 1 I 

1 1 to 1 

1 10 1 

1 It— 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 105 

1 1 Id 

■ 1 100 

1 1 

1 1M 

1 l05 

1 Id 

1 1 I 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 t I 

■ 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

I 1 1 

I 1 1 

1 1 1 4 1 

1 1 1 I 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 t 1 1 

till 

1 I 1 I 
till 

I 1 1 1 

1 1 
t 1 

1 1 

1 I 
t 1 

1 1 

1 4 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

} : 

1 1 

1 1 

1 I 

1 1 

1 ) 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 I 

1 1 I 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 t 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 ( 

1 1 t 1 1 

1 1 1 1 i 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

00 

t^t-00 

1 1 I 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

■ I 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 

M 1 eif 1 
d icio I 

1 rH 1 

1 t 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 d 1 

1 100 ■ 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 I 

1 1 1 

1 1 ^ at 

1 t 11— 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 t 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 t 1 

t I 1 

1 1 *. 

1 ICO 

1 Jt- 
1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 I 

1 1 

1 1 1 I 1 1 

1 1 1 I 1 I 

t 1 1 1 1 1 

I 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 I 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

I 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

■ 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 I 

1 I 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

114 11 

4 1111 

1 1 1 1 1 

4 4 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 I 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

till 
14 11 

till 
till 

1 1 1 1 

till 

1 1 1 1 

1 I I 1 

00 o 

CO ^ 

cod 

d o 

05 d 
CO 00 

00 CO 

OCO 
CD f-H t-H 

O O CO toco 

O '•■H GO CO 

CO O d t-l 

00 CO t- 
O to CO 
CO CO 

CO CO o 

M^Oi-H 

05 CO to 

M^M<00M<O5CO00t-4CD 

M^COCOrHOOCOtOCOO 

C00d00500c0t-d 

00 rH 00 05 
tOM 05 O 

d M to t- 

1 1 

1 11— 00 

1 1 O M 

1 1 05 CO 

1 1 

1 

05 00 ‘ o 

to t— ICO 
to 00 ICO 

OM d 
to 05 IH 
d d M 

to M O 00 CO 1 
to O 05 00 d 1 
01—00005 1 

coo 1 

rH 00 1 

MM 1 

I I 1 

d 1 >05 1 

M 1 ' 05 1 

to 1 100 1 

COM Ito 
COCO ICO 
to CO Ito 

d"t(f 

eo»H 

coco 

05 

o6^ 

pH 

to T-i 05 
CO to »“> --H o 

^ ^ ^ M 

»S «il 

1-H 05 d 
CD to I> 
d M< d 

ooooo 

CO M* 00 
1-H d 

eioicDCDdcoodi-^cd 

i—oodcodOi-Ht-t- 
rH CO CO d 1 -H rH 

CO rH GO CO 
rH rH CO O 
rH rH 05 tH 

• 1 ^ 

1 1 d to 

1 IM CO 

1 1 rH rH 

t I 

1 1 

1 1 

I • 

a. a^ 1 at 

O CO ICO 
to to 1 05 

1 

t 

1 

< 

1 

1 

at a« a. 

t- t- 05 
CO 

rH 

d M M M 00 1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

at at ■ 

dt- t 

d eo 1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

at 1 1 an ? 

00 1 IO 1 

d 1 I d 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

t 1 1 

00 IM 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

t 

1 

• • 

1 t 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

I 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 
t 1 

1 1 
t 1 

1 1 

I 1 

1 1 

1 t 

1 t 

1 1 

1 t 

1 1 

1 1 
t 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 i 

1 1 1 

« 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

■ 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 t 1 i 

1 1 t 1 1 

1 1 1 i 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

■ 1 1 > 1 

1 I 1 1 1 

* 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 I 

1 1 1 1 1 

t 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 I 1 

1 > 1 

1 1 1 

1 I 1 

1 1 > 

1 1 < 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

I 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 t 

S 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 t 1 

1 1 1 

1 > 1 

1 1 I 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 

1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

• 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 I 1 

1 1 • 1 

1 1 1 1 

till 

I'll 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

till 
till 

1 1 1 1 

1111 

1 1 1 1 

till 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 • 1 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

i 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

lilt 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

till 
till 
till 
till 

1 I 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

t 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

I 1 1 

1 1 1 

I 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 I 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 i 1 1 1 

1 1 1 t 1 1 

1 1 I 1 1 1 

• 1 1 1 1 1 

t 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

I 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 I 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

■ 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 I 1 

1 I 1 

t t 1 

! 1 I 1 1 

1 1 1 I « 

1 1 1 1 • 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 I 1 1 

1 t 1 1 1 

1 1 1 « 1 

<1111 

1 1 • 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 I 1 1 1 

lilt 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

till 

1 1 > 1 

till 
till 
fill 

1 1 t 1 

1 1 1 1 

till 

1 1 1 1 

lilt 

1 I 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 t 

1 1 
t 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 > 

1 1 

1 t 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

• I 

1 1 

* 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

< 1 1 

i 1 1 

t 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 t 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 t 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 > 1 1 > 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 > 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 > 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 

> 1 1 

1 t 1 

> 1 t 

1 1 1 

1 1 > 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 t 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 I 1 

> 1 1 

> 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 < 

1 1 > 

■ ■ 1 

1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 

i 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 t 1 1 I 1 1 

1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 I 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

till 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

till 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 I 1 

till 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

till 

1 1 1 I 

1 1 1 I 

till 
III! 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

till 
till 

1 1 ■ 1 

1 1 1 1 

till 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 I 1 

1 1 I 1 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 I 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 I 1 

1 1 1 

1 I 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 I 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 • 

I 1 1 1 1 I 

I 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 I 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 I 

1 I 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 t 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

I 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 t 1 

t 1 1 

I I 1 

1 1 1 

1 t I 

1 1 1 

> 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 > 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 I 1 

1 1 1 t 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 I 1 t 1 

1 I 1 1 1 

I 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

till 
till 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

till 
till 
till 

1 1 1 1 

till 
till 
till 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 

1 ^ 

1 

1 ^ 

d d CO 
d »-H GO 
CO 00 O 

1 1 1 

d > to 1 1 

to 1 d 1 > 

O 1 d i 1 

1 

Qd 1 
O 1 

d CO ' 

1 1 1 

■ > 1 

1 1 1 

• 1 1 

II 1 II 

1 it-. 1 O CO 1 11— 

1 1 to 1 1 -H 05 1 1 rH 

1 1 rH 1 d d 1 1 O 

1 1 

1 1 d 05 

1 t to rH 

1 1 rH rH 

CO > M to 
CO ' 05 CO 
CO ■ CO o 

O CO CO 05 
O CO CO CO 
t- t- CO cO 

OCO d 
005 00 
rH 00 M 

1 I 1 

dCD id 1 1 

Ot- ICO 1 1 

do 1M 1 1 

1 

to t- 1 
001- 1 
to rH 1 

tOM»0 lOO 

to t- 00 ICO 
to CO t- 1 05 

1 1 1 

• dll 

• CO II 

ICO 1 1 

4 *4 

t 1 

1 1 

1 1 
t 1 

t «s 

1 00 

1 CO 

1 

CO l-H 
•V CO t>- 

CO 1 I 1 

F-i 1 to i 1 

O 105 1 1 

M* 05 1 

^ r-. I 

1-H 1 

III 
■ 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 •s t ^ 1 4 

1 ICO I 05 00 1 ' t-. 

1 It— 1 iO to 1 1 to 

1 ICO 1 05 rH 1 • 

I 1 

1 1 00 o 

1 1 CO d 

1 1 M 

CO 1 00 05 
t— 1 rH 05 
^ 1 d rH 

rH O to to 

rH M to O 
rH rH CO 

CO to d 
05 M M 
to t- 

05 d 1M 1 1 

M to 1 II 

1 1 I 

1 1 1 

cb CD 1 
MCO 1 

1 

k 

OOMcb lOO 
CO to rH lOO 
d rH 1 

4 

100 1 1 

1 C5 II 

1 1 1 

1 1 I 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

i t 

1 > 

1 

1 

1 

1 


d 1 1 i 

1 1 1 

1 1 > 

1 ) 1 

> 

1 

1 

1 

1 

III 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 t 

1 I 1 

I 1 M I ' II 

■ ' HH 1 1 • 

II 1 II 

II 1 II 

1 1 f > 

11 — 

1 1 rH 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 

1 

1 

1 


at 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

t 1 

1 

1 

f 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 I i 

1 1 1 

1 I 1 

1 1 1 

o 

d 00 
05 
00 d 

^ ^ ^ 
CO 05 
1-HCOi-i 

CO O CD d 
CO OO CO to CO 
CO to 0>'^ o 

05 00 CO 
CO CO 05 
r>- 05 

05 CO to 
t-. 1-H d 
05 rH 

00OCD0500tOM'C0d 

COOOCOCOCOM<rHOM4 

COOCOdM'OOJdOO 

to CO d 1-H 

C0 05 rH O 
rH d CO O 

CO OM to 
O5CO00M 
d 00 to iH 

t- M O O 
o o d t- 

to t- rH t- 

05 00 eo 
M M CO 

00 O to 

CO CO M CO CO 05 
CO OCO 00 0 05 
rH t- Ot- O O 

o loo 

O ICO 

to 'CO 

rH 1 CO 
• 00 

1 

CO 05 00 00 CO 
00 1 -H 05 CO to 
05 05 to 00 rH 

05 CO 00 CO 
CO O 00 CO 
CO 00 M d 

d o 

O d 

co"d 
CO CO 
d 

to 

Cl 1-1 05 i-f CO 
CO to OO *o 

T-I 05 CO 05 

00 to to 

CD CO 1-H 
05 00 t> 

cdt-^rH 
to M CO 

d rH rH 

CO 00 CO O Mi 05 CO 00 rH 
COdl-HdrHOOOt-d 
00COO5CD*OC0 M< 00 

d OO d 

05 COM CO 

CO CO cot- 

OCO 00 00 
CO CO O 

rnOOOCO 
OCOOCO 
rH M rH 

CO MCO 
CO CO 

to 

rH 00 rH O O M 
d to 00 CC CO rH 
fH rH d 

05 t-^ rH M O 
M 05 to rH d 

rH rH 

to 05 cod 

rH 05 CO rH 




«« 


l-f 

» • 

rH M< rH 

CO 



at 

pH 


1 

1 

1 



O 

t>. 

d CO 

TH 

00 

CO CO ^- 
05 !>- 

T-1 d 

05 CO to CO d 
00 CO 00 to CO 
00 to 1 —* o 

05 o CO 
CD *-> 05 
05 1-H 05 

05 CD »0 
t^ 1-H d 
05 rH 

00OC00500rHM*C005 

COOGdCCt-M^rnOtO 

OC0«(MC0C005d0C 

to COM O 

CO 05 CO d 
*H d M iM 

d o 00 o 

CD CO t- 00 
CDOOd rH 

t-t—C0 05 

o CO 00 to 

d Ml— M 

05 M to 

M M rH 

05 05 o 

to 05 M to CO 05 
CO t- CO rH O 05 

CO t- O d o O 

tot-00 
00 t- CO 
O rH CO 

00 00 CO 00 M 
CO 05 00 00 05 
to d CO 00 O 

05 00 00 CO 

CO eo 00 CO 
eo i-H M d 

d o 

O d 

cd'o 

CO r^ 
d 

•tjj'coof 

OOCOrH 

d d 

to r-T tC r-T CO* 
05 to •«*< •-!t> to 
05 CO 05 

Cl to»o 

00 M* 1-H 
005 C- 

cdt-^i-f 
tp CO 

d T—1 rH 

coodcocfcdt-Tcoodod 
codoodt—cooot— 1 — 

OOCOdCOM^O MOO 

d O" 00 d 

05 CC t- to 

CO CO t- t— 

CC CO t-^ t- 
CO 00 o 
CO CO CO 

CO 1 -H CO os' 
rH O CO CO 
d d M M 

cb 05 CD 
to M t- 
<o d 

O O *-H »b O M 
t— 1 -H GO CO CO rH 
dr-. d 

oocbco’ 

MCO 00 

ob d OO M05 
cb to CO rH o 

^ C4 -4 rH rH 

to 00 CO d 

rH 05 eo rH 
rH 




05 T-l 

*• 

pH pH 


CO M rH rH 

t— 


l« 

CO 





to 

^ 00 
O CO 

CO 

coco 
»c d 

1-t o to 

Tf* 00 ■«—< 
d 

05 CO T-* 00 
00 05 05 o 
1-H d d CO d 

c^coo 
r- CD CO 
d 00 CO 

t^05 to 

d rH CO 
05 C- 05 

dM»HC0t-05dMto 
OOrHi-HOOCCOt—coco 
CD05rHdCOdd050 

CO M d 05 
d CO CO d 

M t- OOO 

d o to 00 

CO CO CO d 
CO 00 1-H 00 

CO to CO 05 
COM 00 1-H 
t-cot-00 

05 00 t— 
05 CO d 
fH d M 

O CO M CO 05 05 

d 00 d o d 05 

M M05 CO 05 o 

rH t— 00 
O to CO 
to CO CO 

O COCO t- M 
00 05 CO 00 C5 

o d CO t—o 

d d 00 00 
1- O 00 05 
00 to M t- 

tC-^ 
to I-H 
O d 

lOt«- 
CO 1-H 
iOCO 

•» •» 
to ^ t>» 
00 to CO 
d d 

c? t^fi-Td'to 

CO O CO to CO 
CO 1 -H ■<5h O to 

M^M^OC 

M ooo 

CO M* 05 

C^tn rH 
OC5 tH 
CO CO d 

00 O CO CO CO M d 05 oi 
0'r^1-Hl005t— OMtO 
OiOOCOdCCOrHCOOS 

»0 rH to 

Ot-1-HtO 

CO M t- 00 

CO CO O d' 
CO COM 

CD to M 

eo to cod' 
CD to CD CO 
d d M to 

a at 

M t- to 
CO to M 
CO M 

d' to to 05 00 M 

t- rH 00 CO CO rH 
d 1-4 d 

OCO CO 
t-t- 00 

t-i d 00 to 05’ 
rH to COCO O 

CO d rH fH rH 

to CO CO <b 

rHO CO rH 
d 

•v 


•b 

O ^H 

«« 

i->d 

pH 

CO to'rH r-T rH 

00 



CO 






pH 

o 

CC' 


to 

CO 

d 

r- 

d 

to 

05 

o 


M 

M 

M 

»o 

00 

05 

t— 


o 

to 

00 

CO 

CO 

to 

d 

d 

05 

CO 

o 

CO 

CO 

to 

eo 

t- 

M 


d 

t- 

00 

M 

M 

to 

o 

»o 

00 


M 

M 

to 

d 

GO 

cb 

cf 

d 

a. 

t- 

d" 

OO 

cb 

o 

m" 

to 

a 

t- 

of 

o 

cb 

of 

00“ 

a 

t- 


00 

to 

d 

M 

05 

to 

05 

pH 

05 

«; 

to 

CO 

05 

CO 

t— 

to 

M 

d 

o 

d 

t- 

CO 


Cl 

d 

CO 

r-i 

M 

o 

to 

CO 

05 

M 

o 

CO 

M 

a 

pS 







^H 

pH 


pH 


^H 

d 

pH 

Pi 

CO 



OC<3C'lr-<t^i--t050?0 

COCC-^t^COOsOOii^ 

cooo«:>c^t^>-Hi;C'i-io 

F-rtC'odt^t^O'TfcTTj?' 

Tj<COCOiO»0«OiOOOO<l 

OC^Ot^OO»*Hr-H<CO 


i-H 1 —t «0 1 —I r-i 


00 CO CO 
CO"^ O 
O t-' 00 

t-H CO ^ 

Ci C> 

GO O O 
Oi ^ 


f'- rH CO CO 
05 'I—* CO CO 
05 00 »0 CO 

CO CO ol'oc 
rH »0 CO CC 
05 CO CO 


CO »0 05 
CO^OOCO 
CO 05 UO 

f-Tt^co of 

05 05 O 
CS CS CO t^ 


t'* t-H 
CO *“« t^ 
05 fH to 

co'‘C'r'tf<' 

>0 05 
05 


to ^ 05 O ^ tM 
CD to O 00 05 
»-H 00 CO 00 Tj* 

CD" »-f CO* CO 
*-H CO 00 o cs 
^ Cl ^ CO 


S '^ 00 
CO y-< 
CO O 

r-foTcf 

05 O CO 
Cl I-H 


00 O CO 00 
00 to O 05 
CO 05 CD to 

to o cTci bf 

CO 00 00 05 
^C1 t-H d »-H 


05 CO d 
•^CO d CO 
CO »-i ^ 

CO 00 t^foT 
<o »o 

CO 


§g 

MW 

<£3 o 
u> 


to 

§ >» 
.9i2 

Sx 

CO 3 


>5 
•1^ 

Q 

CO ^ 

W <1?^ 


C3 

4<5 


2- 


CO 

§■ 

"O-S §5' 


I 


00 
• >-4 

o 
Ck 

03 3 
a> 


>5 

•4^ 


09 

*a 

c9 

0.22^ 
CO ^ 

03 o 

CO. T W 
pl-l^ 

ce^- 


•v 


n 

o 

■*^ 

CO 


3g $sigg||ai;9 2g-a§'3;9::;ss^.'i 

mE^ 'osPm wME-'^SPpHOf^OQ gPiScQ SWcQ^ o 

^ S r3 r3 :::3 «S 

o 


a 

as 

t4 


CO 

o 9 ' ® 

; a o S-g c:<a ' w 

Sl-S'sa^a^'oa.a 

£g.g®o|^S.^og 

<!OOOOfiwE-i!>^ 8 

CO 


a> 

is'-s 

CO CO c3 s 

SII’S 


!2;o 


a 

03 

*a 

bO 
0^ 


a 

o 

-l-d 
b/. 
tl 

43 

CO 
03 

o •• 

03 

bj:*3 

p-g 

*a s 

'Co 


^•prp o) o 

P P. ^ rtS -<2^ 


<D 


o 

> 
ca.2 

s§ 

H 

io^sy-Sg 

^h><5 

O o P 

© O) o 


CO 

p 

C9 


© 

(h 

o 

a 


o3 


03 

♦9 © ® 


a 

© 

03 


p 

o 

CO 

© 

'Im 

as 

43 

o 


l§<”o:3--g 

O ®4: o 2 

03 0 

:2;w 

03 g 


2cq 

^p 
o 

4:> 
CO 

p 


CO 
^ •• 
a c3 

o 

«-l 


cO 


© ® O 

OMiJ Si? 


© CO © 
•'“• 1-^ 
33 43 33 

n ^ ^ Q« ^ 

a 03 © X 3^ 

|o«oy'§ 

-543 

Co -*-* W 
•73 a p 

OcqE^ 


sSII 


o 

CO CO 

03 ^ 
SAh 


43 

•u 

o 


■ f • 

p 

o 


•'S 

I p © 

4^ ®4d 

Sg'g 


o P 

.. 

••'cO^ O ® S’i ®*l=i O 

SqwpHWrg.9;z;a3« 

X £? 

© •P 

Eh > 


- •43 9 ■ 

fe © 2' 

O o i 


( 


95 


See footnotes at end of table. 





























































































































































































































c 

• pm 

P 

0 

U 


Os 

0 

o 

K 

0 

c 

0 

k. 


•v 

«5 


2 

0 

Ik 

a, 

K 

0 

5 

Mart 

0 

k. 

•■k* 

k! 

6 

k 

s 

cn 

^K) 

St 

•)«» 

C 

k 

c 

c 

Q 

0 

•w 

Vi 

•m» 

Vi 

Vi 

O 

4«i 

0 

k 

*■« 

k 

a, 

St 

o 

k) 

•M 

**^ 

>c 

s 

a, 

•w 

St 


I 

lO 

I 

u 

!S 

es 

H 


CO 

'CJ 

a 

3 


£i 

3 

Ph 


2 * 

03 iS 

•r~t C3 

3 


CSf>.O'^»0i--iO^ ot^ 

1-H CiCi ^‘O C^CC 

Oi o <0 QO 00 ‘Cco 

o CD »-r 

O C^ 05 CO 1-H C^ 

0> F-I *1^ »0 ^ DJ •-< 


<s> 

o 

a 

03 

CO 

CO 

CO 

03 

O 

JD 

3 

a 


c. 

>> 

•4^ 

CO 

o 

0 > 

Q. 

CQ 


a> 

X3 

o a 

4-S—' 


8 C^ i-H i-^ *-H 

00 O CO o 

00 O 05 i-H o 

«k •a 

00 C3J O WO ® 00 
O CO --H CO CO 
CO 1-H 


4-9 

H □ 
O 0? ® 
k 

xj fl!2 
••“• 0) 33 

ax3 

'3 


O 00 CD O CO i-H 1 -) o OWO 

CO W w W5 00 05 O CO CD 

CD CD WO CO 05 CO CD h- 05 CO 

WO CO oT tjT CO t>r ,-H od" W50 

05r-* W3 00 O 05"^05 
^ W rH 


05 
(D O 
bAq 
CD ca 
^ -w 

'O CO 

O CO 
CO 

03 


O CO 

C^ W3 r-. 05 CD 
1-H c^ CD W3 00 


CD 

^ 40 

O r3 




CD 

wo CO 
1-H CO 


W3 

05 

Df 

W3 


cs 

•4.5 

o 


O W5 f-H 00 1-H iO 


S CD CO OO 05 05 
05 00 05 CO CD CD 


o w:> 

t- CD 
05 CO 


^ , CD O *0 
05 05 csi e^ 001-H 


SSS<M<*^050 


W3 O 
05 




CO 


03 
u> 

<D 

'3 

CD 

u u 
« bc 
*3 O 

3 ^ 

CO 1^ 

to ^ 

.g 

3 
W 




C0*3 ^ -a 

-4-5 ® ® 

0^X3 HfJ 
2 ® 


Ph 


QJ 

o 


__ OT 

-id 

> is 

.-H O 


a 

c8 

b4 

bi) 

o 

(h 

Ph 


<0 

o 

3 

O 


^ 
t- ® 

0 33 


CO Wb 
O CO 
t'- 05 

•> 

00 00 
‘ 05 

40 


s 




CO 40 

o c^ 

^ 1-H 

00 o' 

CD CO 
CO c^ 

CO 


40 

CO 40 
CO 05 

poo 

?5 *-4 
OQ Dl 
«» 


CO 

CD 

CD 

00 


^ ® 
.fa's 


00 Tfi CO O r-Q CO 05Tf< 

CD CD rf< 00 p ® CD 05 00 00 

Pt-00 05 t-. CD 1-H 

t-r»o CO t-^c^odo o t^od' 

00 CO P 00 O CD 00 l>-P 

00"^ C^i-HCOCD'^ CS 40 

-H CsT 


03 

•4-9 

o 


I-H P CO CO D5 Q CS O 05 

t'. P 00 05 O O wb WbOO 

CD CO 1-H 00 CO CO 1-H 

CD ^ CO CD p oo 1 -H P POO 

t>. CO P 40 P b-00 P PP 
Hfi o PCOCOOOP 05 40 


C5 

•4^ 

o 


CD 05 

CO 

05*“ 

05*' 

00 P CO 

1-H lO 

CO CO rH 

00 CO 00 CO Wb 
05 O Wb p p 
o p CO 

OJ P 
05 

CO Wb 

?5S2§ 

•4^4 O CO 

*4 «k 

CO 1-4 D5 1-H 

IX 00 05 b- O 

X 05 Wb p X 

05*^ 
H}4 GO 
CD 

•> *4 

00 CO 

'ia4"' 

05 

05“ 


— o 

*;=3'3 "S^ 

k( 2 03 ‘c S 

" c. Old 


OPPC^QOPCOP 

COCOPb-PDl^rf 

05.-h(NPD5000P 

od'05'oc^ori-rod4o‘ 

;O^Oi-Ht^POOC5 

COi-HTjipt^-oOO 


P CO 


H}< i-H CO 1^ 


1-4 P 

Wb 00 
00 1-H 

odo 

P CO 

P tN. 
•« 


a 

03 

® 

•4-9 

03 

•4-9 

OQ^ 

ag 

to ® 

> a 

w 

■3-0 

a 

•—4 

.3 

a 

CO 

Im 

bo 

2 

o 


u 

►H 

(X. 

*< 

Ph 

0 

iz; 

◄ 

B 

•d 

6h 

Jz; 

p 

o 


CO 


p>» 


o 
§ 
CO 




05 

a 

!-« 

a 

03 

o 


■ 03 ^ P 

' *!r^ a o3 
bCT^ § « § Q Js ^ 

a C3 dd 2*^ 0-4^ 

gPPH •-•Ph 


d 

coibC 


d 

03 


d 

o 


o 


03 

a 


- ^ b d d'^ P'S § 
®^rt03c3®a..’a2r®^ 
h^Ocooqcq g S^s-gco^ 

•b? ® ® 03 

qo2^ 


to 

§ 

1-4 

•4-5 

> 


^3 

03 

*3 

P 

03 

v-1 

2 

cd p fe 
coco ® 
p p fe 

1-H 1-H 

§ 


•4-9 H-9 

P P 
3 3 

•3 *3 

•45 H-9 

cO o3 

^ 4^ 

P P 


o o 


o 


>> 


g.-p 
•d O 

XJ o 

CO ■*^ 
® CO 

3 '■ 


05 


O' 

P 


<D 

*a« 


Ih 

CD 

.d 


o .)=: 


d 

o 


l>9 

»H 

o 

•4.9 

Ih 

Ih 

O 


© 

■4^ 

a 

'o 

Ih 

o 

-d 

CO 

o 

Ih 

Ph 


CO 

Ih 

© 

Pi 

o 

o 

-4-9 

•4-9 

d 

© 

XJ 

• fH 
© 
d 

♦ -H 

to 

a 

© 


u 

© 

•4-9 

O 

X3 

§ 


X3 

© 

© 

d 


•49 

d 

© 

a 

n 

-d’a 

© o* 

P CO 

•49^2 

O CO 

42‘C 

(3> 

P © -49 

—lu cC 

-o «a 
®-<1 .T 
o 
o,- 
Pi a 
03.2 

>9.g® 

O 03-g 
HH> ©.2 

■gS-H 

£®a 

© -4.9 

-P 

•49 


C5 

© 

Ih 

03 

P 

cO 

Ih 

3 

.P 

© 

03 

© 


X3 

3 

© 

P 


u 

o 


Ih 

o 


'3 

c« 


CO 

O 


CO 

•-H 

CO 

oS 

.Q 

P 

O 

X3 
© 
Ih 

© 
•49 
CO 

d 

a 

XJ 

cO 

CO 

- p 
cS cO 

© *H 
"3 +9 

p © 

© > 

*2 ® 
P -49 

^'2 

o >» 

-go 

§3 


© 

Ih 


P 

a+9^ 

cO CO 

©S o . - w 

Spw^5 

-4 2 •• o •• 

5 ^ 


^ ^ 03 

« as 

- 2«« 
Ih O 

2| 

Pi © 


© 

XJ 

*© 



96 
























































































































































































I 


S AOO 

*0 l-H 

Sg$ 


»C<D0>C^<0»0i-<OC^ 

l>*i-iOt*»‘Ol'«-^»-»'^ 


00 cc 

■^03 O 

o 


05 O »-' 0> 

h* -I9< 


00 


0«0t^05»0t^ci«00»-4»0 

C^C^COOit-i-iQC^CiQOO 

^C4C5ooC^'^<5oc5*-hC^ 


lO 1-H 40 ^ C^ 1-H 
»OC^C005C^ 

l-< ■««»* 


05 05 
CO 00 
1-t r}< 

00 «r 

eo 

CO 

cf 


t^05e5t>.Q 
»o CO CO o o 

05 CO »C 05 

•» »> «k *4 ^ 

^ 05 ooc^ 


00 05 
CO c^ 
!>• 




C^Q00COO5 
05 00 OI 00 

gcoo*o‘csfco“ 

?i ^ ^ 


»oe«<o 

OOQ-^ 
CO O CO 

OOO lO* 
WOOC'* 
04 


^r^05 
g CO r^ 


CM CO 

»o »o ^ 

lO ^ ^ 


^^^»H4O^00COt** 
CMOOit^-^^'cO^Wg 


»OcO t^OOO'^CM*^ 


S CO 05CM CO CO »0 

CO •-< 05 05 e*0 

CM CO 


O^-'t'CM 
»-H CO Q 
05 f-H CM 

00 *’cO*‘QOtC 


iOOO»OOOOQO‘^'«t< 

050COOc0005CMi-h 

»005t^00>-»**00c00- 




»o 


wo CO CM 


05 00 
CO 05 
'«»' CO 

^ _•» 

-*»< Q 
o 


CM CO 
CO 

wo »o 

ss 


CMOOt^ 
05 CO 
00 05 O- 

00 wo CM 



WOt»<OW5i^U5COCOI^ 

O5CMO5COCO00’^COCO 

•^•^OOWOOOt^t^OrS 

*-i"c005‘'^CM‘t^COCM’“cO 
<—• CO wo t'* CO 04 ■ 


CO CM 


1-i CMWO 
i-» CM 00 05 
O-O-'^OO 

«k •s ffk 

OOCOCM 

CO 


CO «-•« 
*--< CO 05 

wo f-H O 

«h *4 «» 

h- 0-> CO 

SS2 


00c0^c000040505 

t^CO00t^W0b-.-^00O5 

»-H^05WOCM0005CO 

Crwo“cO‘T^Tp"<^OW3‘c^ 
'^C0»-<05W3W5®050 
eo wo 1 -c 1 -^ 

»« 

05 


COO-Oh« 

CO h- CO »o 
O CO CM CO 

CM* f-T ^-Tq" c<f 
CO wo CO 00 r^ 


O 00 00 CO i-H 
wo Tt< CO CO 00 »-< 
CO ^ 00 CM CO 

rTjfwo od'oTo*' 
. ^ o t>» ® 

I CO CO ^ CM 


CM 

CM CM 
^ 00 

c-'^oo** 

s 


00 CM 

S oo 
00 


wo wo 

CO 00 

00 oc 


CO CO wo g 05 


CM 

§ 00 

CM 
w: -V 


00 CD 00 
05 i-< 
COi-t 05 

wo'c^ 


05 O wo wo 

CO CM CO 05 
CO Tf i-H t>. CO 

cm'oT^'o 

C0 00&COO5 


r-H lo 
O 

Tj* wo 

*4 

^ ^ CM 


t^’^cp 
CO w w5 


W>Ot*^QCO00O5W0 

Ot^COSCMCMOOt>. 

O5Ot^W0t^u0OCO 

« *4 •« *» 

^ CO t>» wo 

UOCO t*- CM ^ 

wo ^ »-H 


wo CM CO CO 
r^coco-^ 
CO »-H CO 05 

wo CO CO ^ 
C- 00 00 

CO 


1 CM 05 

• CM CM 

1 CM CO 

• G 05 
i(0<0 

• ^ 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

COCJOW5t^i-HW3f-(^F-l 

C5t^00W5O'^-4f<C500 

cooo^cot'-oOi-Hcoeo 

Qd'^czrartCc^tNr^jrec 

COCOCOOCMW3.-<CM05 
rf o CM 1-H 

1 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 • 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 < 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 I 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t 

« 1 i t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

i i 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

■ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 

1 1 1 1 t 1 t 1 t 1 1 

1 1 1 1 I ■ 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i 

1 1 1 t 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 

« 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

I 1 

1 1 

1 t 

1 1 

1 t 

1 t 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 t 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 t 

1 1 1 1 t 

1 1 1 I 1 

1 1 1 1 I 

i ( 1 1 t 

1 1 1 I 1 

1 1 1 t t 

1 t 1 1 t 

t t 1 1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 t 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 I I 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 I 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 I 

1 1 1 

t t t 1 1 

t 1 1 1 1 

t t 1 • t 

1 1 1 t • 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 t 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 t 

1 t 1 1 1 

t 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

70, 666 

237, 400 

106, 885 

1 t 1 

t 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 t 

1 1 t 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

t 1 1 

1 1 1 

I 1 1 

1 1 1 

I « 1 

t 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 

1 1 1 ( 1 t t t 1 

1 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 

1 > 1 1 t t 1 1 1 

1 < 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 > 1 i 1 

1 < t 1 1 1 1 1 I 

1 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 

di *00 i 
CM ' t-- 1 

^ y* t 

CO 'CM 1 
<54 1 

1 

1 

1 

' 1 

1 

CM CM 00 
00 W3 o5 

CC »-l 

♦-HCOCOW5t>.«.-Ht^'^ 
C0 i-hOCM^CM 00Q05 
i-HC405 05 05C0O»Ot>. 

COt'-Ot^iet<’^OOOOOCD»-H 

C0r^C0W5OW5«T}*C0C000»-H 

OCOCMCOO''rcO'ct*GOCMCO 

yt CM 
05 CM 
lO CM 

OC CM O W3 ao 
05 00 Q eo 00 
O OOO 00 00 

CO W3 

CM CM 

CO O 

OOOOO 
•«if o »-* 
CO 1-* 05 

05 O wo lo 
CO CM CO 05 

CO ^ r^oo 

wo 05 

CO 1-H 05 
05 00 1-H 

t>.cOO 

wo 1-1 t>. 
t- CO CM 

WOCMcOCMTfOOi-'WOCM 

05eOOCOCMOt-WOt-H 

*4*eo^cO’^woc‘<,-too 

O CO <05 00 
»-• 00 05 CO 

coS>»coo 

wi M 05’ 
Wi CM t^ 
CM r- ^ 

^t^’^*ed'cMt>7cO'^*od 
»“*t^^O00i-*00CM05 
^00 CM CM CM ^ 

CM".-Ti-T cTcm*^* 4*'wd00 (OT^ 
COW5cOOOt^Q-^»-HOb-05 

CM CO CO *-H ^ 

i-TS" 
oo CO 

CO 

cdcowdoTor 

^ I-* C4 

•4 ^ 

CO Wt 

00 wo 

«co 

CM*orcO o'I-* 

oc 00 05 CO 05 

y^ y^ 

cr-^*cM* 

54 Tf 05 
CO WO CM 

odcoco 
^ wo CO 

^ CM 

•^co»>ororw3odt>^^ 

t-CMCMCMOSO^WOr-. 
^ CO <0 ^ ^ »-* 

woco*adt'r‘ 
1 -^ 05 wo 05 
y* 05 




•4 










OOWOCO 00wo 05 ^ 1 -H CO 
OOSP^S* ^ CO 00 CM oo CO CO t>. 
CO Cm 05 o 05 CO CO eo 


05OCM00gCM00l^ 


CO 00 ^ 00 - . 

03 ^ r~» 05 CO 


_ ■*5t< 

05 CO wo 
O 00 CO Tf 


goo 


CO 


^ S CO S 


05 woo cot^co 

_ __-05 i-hWO 01^1^ 

CMO0>'^05 OOCO t^ooco 


wo CO O 05 CM 
O 0^ 00 TP 




05 


0-^0 COrt^CM CO t*-CO 05O 05 CO wo 

i-« 00 CM O CO O •-• w CO O 05 05 00 

CO CO T-t CM CO T-H o wo CO O CO CO wo 05 


05 CO CO CM 
O 00 
OOCO 


05 “ 


50 O ^ wo CO OCO 00 05 

^ CO 00 o CO 05 05 

i-» CO wo oCO ^ 


h-t^OOC^t>-WOcO'-''^'<tt'CM 
<0050000^O00C0'^05C0 
^ ^ CO ^ ^ ^ 


•-' w^ 

05 CM 
t^CM 


'5' S CD 
CO 00 CM CM 


t- CM 
CO 
»0 CM 


S oo CO 
05 

eo eo 


t^oo 
CO I-H 
CO oc wo 


t^t^O *-H»-«C0Ot>O’^C0Q t«-O5C0<O 

^OOO 05 CM Q CO CM CM ^ Tf O ^ 

05 W t>-CO 1 -^ 00 00 wo CM CM CO CM CO 00 CM 


CO 


CO 


CM 


CO 

s 

9 

1 

1 

1 

f-.OCM05T»*CMc0b-00 

QOQi-'i-HCM^'?fCOCO 

OC40-^C50t'-OOCOCM 

•-* 1 -* -le* op 
wo oc o S 

Tf 1-H 05 O 

« CM wo CM eo 'itf' CO 

1 t- 05 C-. CO 

1 t— MO 1-H 1-H ^ t-- 

wo Tf 

ss 

CP *-H CO Tt* 

W5 05 »-H CO 00 
CPOOCPCO*4« 

wo O 

CM t>* 
CM wo 

CM X cp 
1-H O 
cpl>*^ 

wo CO CP 

X X wo 05 

Itfl HJ* t.. lO 

1 wo X 

105 t-i 
If-H CM 

ss 

^ 1-H 

h- 

eo 

t 

1 

1 

1 

O05 05C0C0C0001-HC0 
oo5'ie'coo5wowoi-Ht>. 
^COCMCO**i*05COt-*^ 

od 1 -H wo wo 

I-H CO CM HJ* 

i O wo wo CM 00 ^ 

1 CO »-H CM r- CM cp 

1 ?-H CO »-H wo 

t-^CM* 
05 rr 

*> «k *4 ^ 

I-I CM CM 05 CO 
O O 1-H I-H 

^ CM 1-* 

1-H CM 

^ ^ 

o ^ wo 
w S wo 

X hsT lo cT t>r 

O CM t^T-i 

iCMCO 

1 wo 

• 

05*^ 

o 


1 

1 

«4 ^ »k »«, 0K 

yr wo 1 -H CM f-* 


1 

t 

00* 




CO 

1 

t 



CO 


wocoeo*-H.-^oct>.'^co 

O5OCMi-'00 00C00500 

COO0COO5O5i-'i-i;CW0 

oT c^cd'wooTcoco'^ 
CO 1 -H CO o 

CO CO f-< 

CM* 1-^ 


00 


t>.C5 

CO CO O ^ 
CO OO CM 

wo |C CO CO 

^ CO CO 
^ 00 


O CO o 
eo b- wo 

•-• 05 CO 

cf wo* tC 
CO cp !>• 
00 ^ 05 

I-Tco 


WOi-«WOCM-<»<CMOOCOC5 

wot>»r-eoeoQco»-'-»tf* 

Ot>.000'^S05Tt<00 

8 *0 oT cTt^ ^ c^ 

CMi-»CMC00505C0’^ 

'^COW0O5W0W0CO'^O5 

ao cfi-H* 


, J , ■ — — -. 

OOCO^OOW005WOCO<DOO 

Q^-C0COt>.'^J*COO5t^W5i-H 

?40000050’-*COWOt^COt^ 

wo* wo” »0 od CM* CO CO 

«t'-C5CMOOrreOOO'«J<CMOO 
ocO'-'coo5i-*tN.wooor^05 

rH ^rH ^W5^f-H»-HCM 




Q 



CO 


wo 

X 


05 

CO 

CO 




CM 

h- 

05 

wo 

c?5 


CO 

CJ5 

CO 




wo 

X 

<55 

o 

t- 


o 


CP 

05 

CM 

o 

05 


X 

X 

wo 

CO 




X 

05 


05 

o 

<c 

05 

o 

o 

CO 

r- 

*4"* 

X 

05 



CM 

05 


CM 

CP 


X 

<55 

CO 



CO 

CO 

wo 

wo 

05 

04 

X 

CO 

X 

05 

CM 

X 


X 

CM 

CM 

CO 

CO 

yi 


CM 

CM 

X 

t- 

r- 



wo y* *H CO ^ ^ ^ 


X 


wo 


o 

X 

5> 

O 


CO 


CO 

CO 

05 

wo 

o 

CM 

CO 

o 


CM 


CM 


o 

04 

X 

X 

o 

$ 

o 

WO 

X 

-itf* 

h- 

^H 

r--. 


05 

X 

w5 

05 

X 

t- 

WO 

t- 

yi 

TJ< 

05 

wo 

CO 

X 

X 

CM 

O 

<55 

o 

o 

WO 

t- 

X 

05 




r- 

wd 

WO 

CD 

<55 

X 

wo 

rH 


X 

X 

X 


04 


WO 

00 

CM 


rH 

o 


*5f 

r- 

r- 


wo 

o 

05 

o 


»c 

O 

CM 


o 

05 

04 

r- 

CO 

CM 

CO 

X 

wo 

05 

05 

X 

X 

fH 


X* 

CM 


CO 



m 

CM* 





CM* 

•k 

rH 



•h 

wo 

«4 

rH 


O CM <5 
X CM WO 
l-H CO X 

CM 

8 

1-Ht-.i-HX'^^Xt-« 

WOXWOWO-rrXXX 

oocMCMxr-r-o 

t-.i-Hr-.osxt^'^t'.coo'^ 

WOWOCMCMt'-i-HXXi-'XWO 

c0OXOOC5-^t-O5W0'^ 

05 WO 
88 

X CM 
X oB 

1-H CM X 
1—' t— t— 
<55 X 

O X 
05X 
<55 X 

05 t- <55 

wo X wo 

Hji CM 

X 05 Q C- X 

r-i b- *4* o 

05 CM CM 1-H ip 

X CO X 
rH ^ CO 
05 WO X 

COXX 
CM WO o 
X ■-4' t>. 

’^Xp-t'-t'-^XXrH 

CMXO»ttP<55C'JXX 

O5»PXXO5COXW0O5 

t- rH UO X 
X WO X o 
CO X^ X 

CM*X* 

Sgg8 

•k 

<55 

§ 

0'odcO*T»7 ■^CM'wdHH 
CMXO5X'^W0O5CM 
t'»b>-WOOWOt'»l-H'^ 

od 1 -e" I-T X 0~ t'T' 00 I-T cm" 
xocMr-xc^wooi-Hwowo 
Ot>*CMX05i-»r-t-CMXW0 

i-H CM 
CM yi 
y X 

CM C5 1-H 05 

1-H X Q TP WO 
05 05 ^ CM X 

O wo* 
O wo 
wo wo 

WO X 

CM CM t- 

He< He* 

CC TT X O 05 
Q t>- WO Tf -1^ 
WO X X X 

cSt^co 
X TP X 
'itf* wo O 

XQ X 
CM ® CO 
CM rH <p 

Cp X cm’ ^ WO wo’ CM 05 
S^xt-xcoxxwo 
CMC400050XXC5 

CO 00 O TP 
X X 

05 05 t"- y 

1-7CO 



CM* i-i-Hj* cd I-* CM 

f-H r— 

^H tH rH rH iO C*l ^ CC 

•k 

wo 



rH 


CO rH rH ^ 

rHXC5| 

1-H*^ 

e 

CM* rH* lO O* CM* CM* Ci rH* 

t^yi 



eo wo f-t 


• eo 


^eOOOW505WOC4CM^ 

CMCMCOOOOOi-^COCOO 

orcM*odcd‘i>rcd'orodor 

?405’^o0’-^coo*:jw 

CCCOCOOOCM05^WOt^ 

•4 •« *4 ^ ^ 

11-(1-<W0*I*<»^CM 


OQO 

CM i-» 05 CM 
<COi'^ao<^ 


' CO CO •-< 05 

05 wo f-H 
> o CM wo ^ »0 


OOWOi-tOO^M'»-H'^CMWOWO 

C0W0tN.C0OO500W0t^CMr- 

^O0COW0f-^Tj'W0CO^'-HO5 


CO wo CM CM CO 


8 J 0 

rH CO 

X X rH CM 

CM WO H^i CO <0 
CO X X CO X 

X S 

TP t>- 

OOO 

rH TP ^ 
X X CO 

wo Tp o ^ wo 

TP rH (54 X rH 
b- O X X I-H 

X 05 o 
X rH X 
F-H O hH 

05 X WO 
X X t- 
CM tP O 

WOCMcOCO^OXXi-hX 

XXOTPX<5505r'-rH 

^k^,..|^«C5C0^-01^- 

COXP-Op 
O TP CM CM 

o t- rH wo 

Hji X 

gi 

WO X CO X 05 
X CM wo 04 
rH Xb- WO CO 

WO CM* 
X t- 
y X 

CM l>. 

xco 
t- CO 

s 

rH 

05 X C35' cm’ X 
CO CM X Q Cp 
tH- X CO CM O 

05 X CD 
CO X X 
f-H 05 ce. 

X*COO 
<55 X 05 
CO X 05 

WO wd T-i X 1-H X CO 1-H 
^05TpO5Ot^C0OW0 
OCOWOWOOCOCOOCO 

05 r-» <b X 
?4 X05 wo 
X CO wo TP 

s 

rH 1 -H CM rH 

«4 

CM 


*. 

rH 

g* rH CM* CM* 

CM* TP* CM* 

A 

r^ t*T, 

A A 

COrHCOCO^N *^04 

^H 

^H ^H ^0 ^H 

y 


00 00 05 

00*0 CM* 
CO »-H 05 
O 1-H CO 


<Ot^O5C0W0«-^Oi-^C0 QCO^t^W0t^00O5^00^ 

Qi0^r<Hi-HCMCO'~'CO'~^ WO^COCM^»—'t^p5^»od4 
05 eo co ^ 05 ^ wo O ^ CO CO CM OO CM 


t^C0'>^00COW0OO5Cp 

t>.OOWOOOCO^f^OOCp 

COOOCOOOCMOWOWOf>- 


COCMt«-W0’^C5CMO5COr*-CO 

oooo^cD005Cot::.Q^05 

i-H00^W0»-H^t^O5OCM0> 


eo wo 1 — r 1 —wo »-H CO ^ ^ CM rH I —1 f-H ^ h- CD CM CM eo 

»«»•(>- r- ^ oD ^ *“ »» ^ ^ 


oo 

X rH 

wo X o X CM 

cp CM X X rH 

IQ 04 X wo X 

05 CM 
CO <55 
X 

CMQ 

Smo 

Tp 

g 

CpXQCMC4 
O rr O <55 *4* 
O X X aC 05 

X rH «0 
CM CM 
aQ O WO 

cm’ cd 

TP 

CP CD 

t- O x CM rH 
X wo O wo 

rH Tp X ao CO 

C© 

SS cC 
y oo 

rH 05 

X CO 
r- CO 

8 

rr 

X rH 05 rH 

O X TP ox 
O X X CM CO 

00 rH 1-H 
05 CM rH 
rH ^ 

CM* 

CO 

•4 ^ *4 

rH ^ CM rH 

CM* 


rH 

1 -H rH CM C4 

CM 

cfkSco 

9 


eoo^ 

2?8K 


' 05 O CO ^ wo 
CO wo 00 00 

1 CM 1 -) o CM d4 


^ o 

b- C CO 
CO t>- 


^cooo CO CO ^ CO CO w: o oowo*^wo 

<^05 05 O 05 CO Cp O CO b-CO COOCOCO 

CMr^O i-» CO « r-t CO o S cocooo^ 


CMWOCO CMb»»-c COWCO^'^CM ^ CM r-i-^ O •-* 


M 

H 

z 

◄ 

ij 

H 

Q 

Q 


Jr* CO 

^ U< Oi 

4) 




q 

s • • 

o 

u 


y-1 

<15 


CO 


—.,.,<53 


o 


05 

'Z 


u 

03 

^ CO 

br.'^ 
S'<y 
^ o 


05 

CO 

s 

o 

q 


03^ 

fl 

o 


a 

S2*3 

05 <a 

> 


a 

o 


a 

05 

cs,q ui 

a 05 ® 


CO 


45 

■I 

flW 

I 

CO 
45 


^ atj 

o 45 g 

«ss« 

„ - -45 »a'C "g 43 

§-^<;pquw.Sph^p5w^ 
a 

45 

Oh 




< 

PS 

H 

z 

» 

o 

a 

t- 

PS 

o 

z 


TS 


• $ 

VJ 

*5 

a 


Ccq 

Q. 


eo 


45 CO 

® r 
s b 

® G 


45 


o a ^ 

,25 2 

_> O '2 c ® 

Oco.2WCs<h-toQE- 
TT 

c 


CO 

G -1^ 

•r-i 

OQ 

Sog 
•csfiS I 

w 


>* 


s5.| 

S£5 

CS o 


q 

® CO 
^bfl 45 ;q 


CO 

t: 

G. 

03 

pH ^ 

'2.2 

c -e 


CO 

G 

S*S)S 

o q ® 


«5 

o5 


o 

C5 a 
45 3 


P>5 

4^ 





o 


45 G CO .G 

•« 45 JH 



97 


See footnotes at end of table. 



































































































































































































































c 

0 

u 

Os 


e 

e 

t 

e 

nC 

K 


ts 

<4 

S 

0 

k 

a, 

k 

0 

S 

Q 

k 

k 

k 

S' 

k 

c 

s 

4 

t 

•*m 

z 

k 

© 

k 

C 

c 

k 

k 

c 

e 

4w 

4 

•w 

4 

50 

Q 

k 

•k 

k 

•M 

k 

a. 

k 

c 


pC 


‘o' 

k 

s 

s 

0 

s 

1 

• 

so 

I 

U 

k 

2 

03 

H 


w 

TS 

fl 

0 

*M 

o 

•i-^ 

Xi 

o 

Ph 


Q <e 
•*5 CG 

I'S 

£*2 


O O Oi 
00 C^ ’-' TP 
rH 


»-• t>» Oi 

T—I lO *—' t'- 

05 o «o as 


CO 05 t«* 
*o 05 CO 
uo CO so 


1— 00 CO ^ 00 05 
so «3' so CO 1-H 
»-< CO so CO CO r^ 


CO 00 O 
O O CSJ 
C^ rH T-H 


O O CD C^ t>* 

^ <M O CM o 

CD ot^ so CM 


OCO CM 
CO < 05 

00 so 


CMOOQt^OCMOOO 
i-hOWSO»— i’-^GOt>- 
^ 1-H O O 


t'- 


CO r-. 
CO CO 


05 so CO 
CM 00 05 


CO CM CD 
l-H »-i CO 
»-l CO 


t>* CD CM CM CM 00 
CO CM 


CO o ^ 
CO 


05 so 00 CO 
SO CM 


rH 051>- 
CO 1-H CO 


COCMCOt^t^ 
CD rH T-H CM 
SO CM 


S?5S? 


CM rr 
CM 05 

k «k 

CM CM 

W 


O 

p 

c3 

m 

CG 

CG 

03 


Xi 

P 

a 


to 

<D 

a 


C6 

o 

<D 

a 

CQ 


03 

U 

© 

'2 

■Si 

03 

u u 
© to 
'V o 

ga 

CG 1^ 

to b 
« 2 
•S^ 

lx 

© 

H 


© 

■ III 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 

1 CO 

SO SO CO 

1 1 

1 I 

1 

1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 
1 1 1 

1 

1 


1 1 1 
1 1 1 

1 1 

1 i 

1 

1 

1 1 

CD CM 05 tH 05 05 I I 

1 1 

1 1 


till 

1 1 

1 00 

iH tH CM 

1 1 

1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 

1 

1 1 1 

1 1 

1 

CD 05 tH CD 0 I-H 1 1 

1 1 

H— 

till 

till 

1 1 

1 1 

I so 

CM tH 0 

1 1 

1 1 

1 

4 1 1 
1 1 I 

1 1 1 

t 1 1 

1 

1 

4 

4 

1 1 I 
1 1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

CO Hji CM CO TJH CM 1 1 

FT Fs Fk Fk Fs Fk 1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

0 P 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 
t 1 

1 CO 

1 CM 

b* ’>9^ b- 
CD 

1 1 

1 I 

1 

1 

1 1 1 
1 1 1 

1 1 1 

4 1 1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 1 1 
1 1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 
i 1 

Ob-Ob-CMb* 1 4 

CM rH CO rH CO CO 1 » 

1 1 

1 1 


1 1 1 1 

1 1 

1 ^ 


{ 1 


1 1 1 

1 1 1 

t 

1 

1 1 t 

1 1 

1 

SO rH II 

1 1 

73 rP 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

1 I 

1 1 

1 P 


1 1 

1 1 

1 

1 

t 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 
1 1 1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 1 t 
t 1 1 

1 1 

4 1 

1 

1 1 

t 1 

1 1 

I 1 
> 1 

< 

1 1 1 1 

lilt 

lift 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 

1 

1 


1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 

1 

1 

1 I 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 I 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 1 1 
1 1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

I 1 

1 

1 

{ 

1 1 

1 I 

1 r 

1 1 

1 1 
t 1 

4-3 

1 1 

1 1 ?0 hH 

05 rH 

1 

1 CO 

1 

1 0 rH 

QOOtHOOiH I 

000 « 



1 1 

100 1 

CD CM 

1 

1 CO 

rHOb-rHTHCOSOSO 

0 so 

0 g g 

*^73 Ih 

1 1 CO SO 

hH 00 

1 b- 

1 CM 00 

0 05 SO sO 05 I 

CM 0 1 

CM 


10 1 

TJ1 t-x 

1 CM 

tHtHSOOCtHCOCOi-H 

00 so 

1 1 00 00 

00 0 

lOO 

1 CO 05 

CO 0 CM SO so 1 

bx 0 1 

b- 


1 CD 1 

CO CO 

1 CM 

CMC5<DCOb>.00 05CO 

CO CM 

■ ^ #k Fs 

1 1 05 <D 

Fk FV 

CO eo 

1 CO 

^ Fs F4 

1 CO CD 

Fk F> Fk F^ 1 

rH tH HH CO b* 1 

cm*1d 1 

Ft 


1 Ft 1 

1 iH 1 

CM^bT 

I 

1 

FsFsFs FsFsFrFsFa 

CDOCD05CM00b*O 

F. Fs 

CO CO 

73 P'P 

1 1 so ^ 

CO HH 

1 CD 

1 

i 00 

1 



1 

CM CO 1 

CM 


1 CM I 


1 

tH05(X)CD05 05 05tH 

rH 0 

-7 ©73 

< o<x 

1 l<^l-H 

1 1 



1 

1 




1 1 

1 1 

1 i 


1 

1 

1 

CD CO hH 



1 

1 

© © 

73 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 ( 

J 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

i 

1 



1 

1 

1 

1 




1 I 

1 1 

1 1 

I 1 


1 

1 

1 



© 

1 1 1 

1 lb* 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 

1 CM 

1 t 

1 1 b* 

1 1 

1 1 


1 I 1 

1 1 1 

• 1 I 

1 1 1 

1 

1 


1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

05COCOOOOOCO 'co 

1 1 

1 1 

1 ISO • 

1 1 

1 TH 

1 1 b— 

1 1 


1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 


1 I 1 

1 I 

I 1 

rHOObrSOCMTH 1 

1 I 

© © 
bjD P 
© © 

1 1 so 1 

1 1 

■ CM 

1 iCM 

1 1 - 

1 1 0 

I 1 


1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 


1 1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

05 so CD CO b* bH ICO 

Ob^r-TcOcd'cD 1 C^ 

1 1 

1 1 

1 * ^ 

1 1 05 < 

1 1 

1 1 

1 F^ 

■ 00 

1 

i 1 

1 1 

1 

1 

III 

1 1 1 

III 

1 1 1 

J 

1 

1 

1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 


1 1 00 * 

1 1 

1 1 so 

1 1 


1 1 1 

1 1 1 

I 


1 1 1 

I 1 

1 1 

00 CD so b* b* 05 ' 

I 1 

73 CG 

XX -rX 

1 } 

1 1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 

1 

r 1 

1 1 

» t 

1 1 

1 

1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 

1 


1 1 1 

I 1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

CO rH rH CO ‘ 

^ 1 

1 1 

1 1 

W CG 

1 1 i 

1 1 

1 

1 1 

1 1 


i 1 I 

1 1 1 

1 


1 1 1 

1 1 

t 1 

rH 1 

1 

4 

1 

1 1 

© 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 I 

1 1 

t > 

1 1 

1 

1 

1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 \ 


1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 I 

1 1 1 

I 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 

1 

I 


1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 


1 1 

1 1 CO ^ 

05 1-H 

1 

• 00 

so so tH 

1 

Q 00 TH 00 1-H i 
0 05 so so 05 1 

OOO 1 


1 

1 1 

1 00 1 

CD CM 

1 

1 CO 

COS005COrHOOiOOO 

0 so 


1 1 05 so 

TH 00 

' 05 

1H CD 00 

CM 0 i 

CM 


lO 1 

TH b* 

1 CM 

C5rHb*O00 05C0s0 

00 so 


1 I CO 00 

00 0 

1 CD 

CM b* CM 

CD 0 CM »0 so 1 

b-o 1 

b- 

1 

ICO ' 

COCO 

1 CM 

THO*Ct'-00b*05rH 

CO CM 

© 

1 ^ Fs 

1 1 05 <D 

k Fs 

CD CO 

* F« 

• SO 

Fk F* 

b*b*TH 

r-iTHHHeCbC 1 

•k Fk 1 

CM CD i 

Ft 

1 

' Fs * 

f ^ 1 

Ft Fk 

CMb* 

1 

b-T co 00 CO 00 cm' b-^ CO 
THb>-CDCDTHC00500 
SO 05 CM CM 05 CM 

CO cd 


1 1 Tf 

CO '9' 

•05 

1 

0 



1 

CM CO ' 

CM 


iCM 1 


1 

rH 0 

w 

1 1 1 -H rH 

CM 



1 




1 1 


1 

rH rH 

E-* 

1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 


1 

1 

1 

1 

i 




1 

1 

1 

1 

1 




1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 t 

1 1 


1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

Fs 

CM 


i9'fl 

4-3 © 

1 1 1 1 

till 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

t 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

I 1 

1 t 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

t 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 

1 1 1 

1 > 1 

1 I 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

I 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 ft 1 

1 

1 

1 

t 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

■ 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

■ a 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

A 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

ilftllllft 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

® o3 4^0 

eg>>^ 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

till 
1111 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

• 1 

i i 

1 

111 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

t 1 

1 

t 

1 

1 

1 

III 

1 I 1 

t 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

ft V 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

> 

( 

1 

1 

4 

1 

1 

1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 
i 1 

I 1 

1 1 
t 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 


1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

till 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

ii 

I 1 1 

1 1 1 

• 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 

1 1 
• 1 

1 1 

1 

1 

1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 I 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 I 

1 1 1 

i 

1 

( 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

■ 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 t 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 


. CO 

rp^ 


B 

© 

lx 

to 

o 

lx 

pH 


CD b- CO 
f-i C5 

i-» O <D b*- 

k k 

CO O O 
rt< CD 

CD r-« 05 

6^ 


CM SO CO 
CD CM O 
GO O ^ 

■sjs CD CO »-( 
bx>^J- QO b* 
CM CO 


OO O SO 
CD •—I »—t 
CD b- 


O GO SO 
OCO 
CM so 




CM CO —H so Tt’ CO 
SO CD CO CO O ’-t 
b- CD 05 CO 
^ *1. ^ ^ 
CO b- bx CO CO 
05 05 05 

^ ^ CO CM 


CO bx tx 
CO bx 
I—< 1—( CD 

««• k •'k 

O CM 
rH O bx 
CM f-H 


CO so so so 1 -H 
CO CO 05 b- 05 
bx O CD 05 1 -H 

CO oToTo csf 

CM CM »-H COHf 
CO »0 SO 


CD bx O O 
so so lx rji 
CM CO O bx 


CO COCO 
CM Tji 


DOOC5S005CM 05 00 
0 CT Hji SO 05 CM 1 —I F-i CO 
M 00 00 CM CM CM 1-H i-h O 


S 


SOCDOOC5S005CM 
00 OQ CT Hji SO 05 CM 
rP cl 00 00 CM CM CM 

CO'•^CO CM* CD CD'od' CMi!H' 
05 rt< bx o bx 1 -H O CD CO 
CM bx i-H ^ T-H -Tt*-Tf OOCO 

CO T-i 


© 

•*x 

© 

lx 

13 

lx 

© 

a 

© 

O 


^ Six 

u 2 

o:p 


so CO OO 
OCO 05 
05 CM CD 

cooTcM^Tir 

05 1 -H o bx 
00 HJH CD 


00 CM CM rH 

SO 05 bx 00 
o CO bx bx 
^ 

CM bx 05 CM 
CO CO CO CM 
CO CO bx bx 


rb rjs so 
txCM GO 
Obxio 

k vh ^ 

so CO CM 
T-H 05 CO 
COCM Hjs 


§s 


1 -H bx CO CM o 1 -H 

■ 00 05 O CO tH 

f-H so 05 05 O 
^ ^ 
O O GO CM CM SO 
bx rf< »0 b3 00 
rH rH rH i-H CO CM 


SO 05 O 
bx 00 
CD 1-H CO 

cTcD 00 

CO 00 1-H 
rH bx rH 


CO CM 1 -H bx CO 

rH so CD 1 -H bx 
CO CD 05 CM »0 


k «s 


05 so CD 00 bx 
1-H 1-H 00 CD CO 
1-H CO CM 1-H CD 


bx CO 
TH so 
05 bx 

cfco" 
CO so 


P CM CO 


bx 

so 

bx 


0 

tH 

1 CO 

CO 

1 CM 

tH 

b* 

0 

1 CD 

05 

1 0 

CM 

CD 

b* 

1 CO 

1 

CD 

1 CO 

1 

05 

CO 

co" 

1 tH 

'seT 

1 Fs 

• CM 

Fs 

CO 

SO 

05 

I 00 

rH 

1 00 

CM 

CD 

CO 

1 CM 

CM 

1 b* 

1 

CO 

CO 


1 

Ft 

CO 

■ Fk 

IlH 



00 CO 
1 -H bx 

TH O 

co'co 

Oso 


S.2 
.is'3 
P*- 


C0 050bx 
05 05 bx tH 
tH CD bx CO 

tH CD "SH CO 
05 CO rH CO 
CO 1 H TH CO 
^ r 


bx rH CO 05 
Hj« TH COCM 
tH 05 TH 1 -H 

«N k 

bx 00 CD 1 -H 
CO 00 I-H 1 -H 

CM CM CM 


05 05 
CM CO O 
CDbxOO 

♦s •« •» 

CO GO SO 
CD CO 
tH CD 


1-H SO CO CO tH 05 
b- 05 bx Obx SO 

•sC< 05 O 05 bx-sji 

^ Vs »« 

TH 1 -H 1 -x 05 CM 

rH CO bxbx bx 05 
I-H CO TH CM SO 


bx bx CO 
CO CD 05 
OCO SO 

05 (xTcm*' 

CO tH TH 


bx CD SO so O 

O CO CM 1-H bx 

05 00 CO CD CD 

i-HObxbx05 
bx 1 -H so CO CO 
sOCMCOOtH 


1 -H tH 1 -H CO 
OO CM CM bx 
05 CO SO rH 

05 rH TH CO 
iiH CD CO CM 
1 -H rH CM 


OCDCDiHCMbxCDOO 

00COO5i-HCMbxCO’5H 

COCDCOrHbxOCMO 

oco'c5'of5'oc<rc<ro 

CObxOOi-HOsOCO 

sOCOCM-sHOi-hOOtH 


CD CM 


CM CM 


O 05 
rH bx 

CO CD 
S0’‘C0 

rH tH 

COCO 
hH 1 -h 





CO CM 00 r-H 
05 CD rH tH 

CO 05 CM 0 

SOCOSOO 

0 CO 0 rx 
SO CO CM 05 

CO CO 05 
0 rH CO 
b* SO CO 

CM CM CD SO hH 0 
sOCOCOOOb- 
rH CD OC b* hH 

CM CD CO 
rH -94 b* 
b* SO CM 

COCO CD CM CO 
DM CO 00 CO tH 
CM SO SO 00 CM 

00 b*rH CO 

CM b* CM CD 

05 SO so CM 

OOeOOOOb*OOCM 

SOb*O500rHbs.C0b* 

s0C0C0tHtHO»O05 

00 CM 
CM so 
b- b* 



'© 

4H 

0 

cd SO b-T CO 
00 SO rH 0 
b* »c 00 CO 

Fs Fs Fk 

05 CD CD CO 
05 CM so CO 
Ob-05 05 

Fs Fk Fs 

GO CM 00 
bxOCD 
CM CO 0 

Fs Ft Fs Fs Fs Fk 

THCMCMTHCMb* 

sOOCMCMi-Hb- 

CM SO CO-kCi 05 CO 

Fs Fs Fs 

rH ^ rH 
b* CO CD 
rH 00 CM 

Fs Fk Fs Fs Fs 

1-H CD TH SO b* 
05CMTHOb- 
CD *D CDCM 0 

CM so' TH so 

CO rH CO 00 

CM CO rH 05 

oTbTcTc^COC^rTH'cD 
00 CD 0 05 CM 0 CO SO 
rHb*CMCDCMrHCDb- 

06 rH 
rx 0 
TH TH 



Eh 

r ». _ ra 

rH rH CM 

1-H rH 

Fs 

CO 

00 



Fk Fs F 

^ ?H rH 


g cm" so CM"cdrH 

tH i-h^ 




TH CD 00 CO 
rH so 06 rH 

SO 0 CM CD 

CD 05 00 CM 
1 -H CO 0 SO 
CM 15 H CD b* 

CD 00 SO 
00 00 00 
so 050 

TH CO rH 00 03 CO 
OTH SO tH 05 00 
00 0 CO CD CM 

SO rH 0 
CD 0 SO 
SO b- 05 

b* CO rH SO 

CM b* 00 rH CO 
b* SO CM -iSi TH 

OCD rH CD 

CO 005 CM 

SO CO SO CM 

rHi-xiOCOOOOO^CM 

COb*CDCMsOb-OTH 

sDCDOOOsCrHbrCM 

b* so 

CM tH 
CM 0 


© 

4H 

0 


F. Fs F. Fs 

1-H CD b* CO 
CO rH 0 CO 
b- 0 CO 

Fk Fk • F 

rH SO 05 0 
rH 1 -H CO 0 
CD 0 CD CM 

Fs Fs Fk 

CD 00 00 
CM rH CO 
SO SO 00 

F» Fs Fs Fk Fs 

CM rH tH CD CO rH 
SO CM b- CM rH 05 
CO CD b* so CO so 

tH TjTcd 
Ob* CO 
Tji CM TH 

•k Fk Fs Fs Ft 

CD SO tH 00 05 
CO so CD SO rH 
rH 00 0 b* CO 

F Fs F Fs 

SO CD 0 TH 

00 CD CD CO 

CO rH rH 

0 b-T CM"05 r-Ti-T b^ od 
COOOtHsosOOOtHtH 
OTHCOCOCOb*rHCM 

THCb 
05 CD 
CO 00 


Eh 


c^f c^Tcd 

Fs Fk Fs Fk 

rH 1 -H CM rH 

Fs 

hH 

Fk 

00 

FT 

rH 

Fs 

r-H 

Fs Fs Fs Fs 

CM rH rH rH 

F 

CD TH rH"b-rCM tHCM" 

CM 

iOrX 

Total 

public 

and 

© CT 


00 CM CO CM 
05 CC' 03 CD 

CM 0 cob- 

b-<C)b*05 
CM 03 CM CM 
rH -kf CM b- 

05 b- CM 
CO 00 CM 
rH CO CD 

so rH tH CM b-CM 
SO 05 0 00 rH CO 
05 CO rH 05 0 0 

00 05 0 

CO 0 b* 
b* 00 0 

b* CO b* b* rH 
CO 05 00 CO tH 
CO SO 05 05 CD 

TH CD TH 00 

CD rH 00 CO 

05 0 TH b* 

C005SOO00CMCMO 

THb*THOOCOOOOOCM 

CMOOOCDOOOOCO 

05 05 

05 rH 

TH 0 

S 73 

.P P 


Fs Fs Fk Fk 

05 CD 0 b- 
t-x r-X rH ts- 

tH b- CO CD 

rH^OedsO 
CM TH CM 05 
CD 0 b* Oft 

Fs Fs 

0 rX TH 
HH CO CM 
CD SO CM 

Fs Fk Fs Fk Fk Fs 

05 b* b- 00 CO 0 
so CM b* so CO 0 
CO CD b* so CO CO 

Fs Fs Fs 

0 tH 00 
rH 0 b* 
T 94 TH tH 

•s Fs Fs F F. 

CD 0 CM CM SO 
05 b* b* 1'* tH 
rH 00 0 i- CD 

• s F Fs F 

tH rH 0 rH 
rH 0 00 b* 

^ CD rH rH 

T9roo5CDod'rH'TH'xH" 

b*sosOb-b*CDb*C0 

sOsOCDCOSOOOrHCO 

CD" cm" 
CD b* 

TH 00 

lx q 

P^fl 


cm" CM"cd 

rx rH CM rX 


Fk 

05 

Fs 

F> 

rH 

F F Fs Fs 

CM rH rH rH 

F 

CD tH rH"b<rCM"-^"CM 
CM 

F F 

SO rH 


PJ 

a 

03 

© 

a 

OQ 

q 03 

.2 2 
CO c3 

> a 

P3 o3 

Ck 

03 

lx 

U) 

o 

© 

O 


ra 

Hj 

oi 

Z 

Pd 

O 

K 

H 

P 

O 

TO 

P 

< 

►X 

H 

z 

< 

e 

W 

Eh 

P 

O 

CO 


a 


© 


a 

© 

X 

Q.2 ..vx 

— ® o 

UrO U 



a.t35 a o ^ 


J-'q 

© 


© 4-3 lx 

o 


© .t-H 


ppj=k 


© 

.73 

> 

q • . 

3x *rT • • • . 

s 

^1.2^ § 
£f-3.s 

o a q 
© © o 
OMP 


iH q I ^ 

Ch O rr! ■*■=* 

CG.P 


© 
Pto 
o 


9© 

Oi © 

to 


d 

o 

-4-3 

CG 

© 

rX 

lx 

© 

X 

O 


X 

CG 

a 

© 


3 


© 

a 


© 


o 

lx 


© 


© CG © 

rPiPp: 
> Cl p> 


a © ® « qja 
Q 59 o 5X5 


.a 

4.3 

lx 

O 


a 

o 


CG 2 
OS ^ 

£;>£<500^-35 cM§Z SPHP^Wm 

S g - M a ii 


4-3 

lx 

o 


p 
O P 


p 

o 

H3 

to 

p 

4-3 

P 

P 

W 


CG 

P 

o 


T) 

. P ^ 
M OM 

-r 


© *p 


© lx 


© 




OoqH 


X 

© 

Eh 


bX) 

lx 




© 
P 
b‘ 

P 

©;r 

ot> 


XH 

CG 

© 


O 

Z 

D 

< 

Ph 

P 

Iz; 

Hi 

iz; 

g 

P 

O 


CG 

© 


8 

CG 

1 

o p 


>» 

4-3 


<1^^ 05 


to 

lx 


® »p 22 © 

§073 © a?©Q 

.. fl q q-2 


©x5< © 

' cg 3 
o 


p p 'X fci 

©Af^ o 

o P p'p 
© © © ce 


q © -^ 

© 
P“ 


Ph' 


© 
r—> rH 

P 


© 

a 

w O 
© 2 


© 


o^2SSgg..-^Sg 

O TO TO TO g -S ^ 

^H Oj © /H 


p 

o 

p 

X 

p 

p 

p 

© 


73 

© 

4^ 

© 

4-3 

CG 

lx 

© 

> 

o 

© 

lx 

2 

© 

lx 

© 

X 

-4-3 

© 

lx 

© 

CO 

13 

4H 

o 

4-3 
• ^ 

4-3 

P 

P 

8 

o 

4.3 

CG 

© 


I 

lx 

© 

> 

o 

© 


© 

lx 

© 


o 

lx 

© 

CG 

13 

-4-3 

O 

4H 

CG 

u 

© 

P 

O 

«rx 

o 

o 

> 

CO 

P 

o 

X 

© 

f>s 

4.3 

P 

P 

o 

© 


CG 

© 


TP 

© 

4-3 

© 

4-3 

CG 

lx 

© 

7S 

P 

P 

© 

lx 

2 

© 

lx 

© 

X 


© 

lx 

© 

CG 

13 


© © 


© 

lx 


© 

lx 


O 

O 

4H 

CG 

© 

•H3 

© 

© 


a a 9 


© 

lx 

bjo 

O 

lx 

Ph 

CG 

M 

(x 

O 


© 

u* 

bJD 

O 

lx * 

e^a 

CG ® 
© 


lx 

o 


> 

O 

lx 

2 

© 

lx 

S 14 J 

—H 7r 

P 

r*H ® 

t? 

© 


P 

O 
> C3 

O p 


© 

lx 

to 

o 

lx 

Ph 

CG 

.id 

lx 

O 

ter 


© 

lx 

2 

© 

lx 

© 

X 

4.3 

© 

M 

© 

CG 

© 

4H 

O 

4.3 

•4H 
• rX 
© 

O 

4^ 

© 

•4H 

© 

© 

lx 

'p 

© 


CO 

© 

O. 

>» 

4H 

lx 

© 

X 


CG 

§ 

•-X 

lx 

© 

> 

'O 

p 

© 

a 

£ © 


CG 

rid 

lx 

o 


P qH O P3 > 


5 O 


lx 

o 


P 

P 
© © 
lx © 

P 4H 

.rx'P 

Ph © 

eo q 
4-3 
CG 


> 

O 

lx 

O 

4x 

© 

lx 

S)^ 

—H sj 

fr. P 
^ © 
4H 

X 

© 


P 

is 

o 

p 

.id 

P 

p^ 
©•3 


CG 


o o 

CG 'P 

© © © 
lx -IJ 4 S 

P^ © 
Ph gpH 

o 73 -X 

P "" 
P 


.§2 

s§ .a 

^ O CG © 

* 1 : £ 

© 

CG 


o 

p 


M w 

© Q. 

lx - 


O 

o 


o 

WJ lx -rr 
w ® 

4H k, P 

CD ® 

2 bfi 53 73 
©^ ^ fl 

Ix'^rx.-x 

X3 p2 § 

3 bD'fl ® 

rfl 




© p 
3 ® 

S.a 


© 

Ph 


lx 

© 

X 


Ph w © 

© 

ca-s 


© 

X 

o 

*rx 


fl 

o 


© 


l4 P 

© © 

.■ga 

Ss §. 2 - 


t\5 ^ 
© 


© © 
X • 


o 

p 

4-3 

o 

o 


-p 
© 

© © 
-X lx 

© 


CG 

bJD O* 

q © 
•P 
P w 

©.a 

© lx 


'g<ijga 


7:3 

P 


> 3 ' 

lx 

O 


-H? lx 


lx 

lx 

© 

4-3 

© 

X 

4-3 

lx 

.0 


b 2* ^ P ® 
goscago j 

'■g “2 9 “ 

© il _i7 —H 

£g.aSj 

o.a 2 

© o S-^ 

«P JH fl Six 
-*^.3 73 O 

o g-S-g 

Ch ® o fl 

a g« °3 

^ ^ S o 52 
otq ® a 
• 'fl :r3 25 © 

rvW'O © 2 

Os-*^ ® q o 

C3§x:x 2 

TO P gpj-g 

- SrpF O 

■1.3 ^ ^ 


© 

73 

p 

p 

73 

© 

>» 

o 

Pi 

a 

© 

CG 

p 

o 

CG 

lx 

© 

Pi 


r T 
© 


CG 

' bio 
'2 ^ 
© p 
p H 


CG 

• Pk 

§ 

UP 

P 

o 

73 

© 

lx 

©, 

CG 

* 

P' 

•fH 

a< 

T3. 

© 

CG 


98 



































































































































































Table C— 7 •—Amount of public and private assistance and earnings under specified Federal work programs^ by urban area^ 1934 


« 

(£a 


s 

CO 

<& 


0)00 0^00 CO 

^ ^ GO 

oi“o coo-^" 


jH<^»^c^o)r^ooo)*-i’^h»»ooo 

t>»^c^.-icoh-ooouoeo»ocoi-i 


00 


CO CO »o 
C0«0 1-H-^CO 


S -h- t>r<o 00 

I-H »o t» O) 


O) Ud CO 
CO O 00 
1 -H CD O) 

lOoTi-T 
^ CO 


^O)cor^coo>g>b»'«j' 

0)COC^C^»OOOCO'«»‘ 

’^t^CDOOOOOJuOCO’^ 

t>r<^c4‘'^o)cDio^cr 

CO 1-H o 
OI 00 

»D 


0)^Ot^*-4h'.i-HHJ*^CO^ 

0 ^ 0 »D’^CDt^*OeOCO® 

C^OOcD»O^OOi-<f-HO»Oc5 


t- lO 


CO ^ O ^ O w 
t-- ^CO CDW 


COM 
1“H »c 
00 CD 

O) 


h-i CO 
00 
1-4 ^ 


o 

o 

a 

CS 

CO 

•M 

CO 

to 

03 

o 

2 

S3 

a 


CO 

«> 

Q. 


c 3 

V 

a 

CQ 


0 ) 

iD 

s 

-^40 

s 

0 c 

M 

•4^ 

ss 

'OS 

CO 

<1 


Tt< 0 > »0 o M 

CO ID I- »D Tt< 
1-H O I-H CO 


^O)h-OOUOOOMO^COO> 

»CMC0»0CDt^i-Ht^Oi4j4b-O 


*-H HJ4 CO 


^-^OOOMCDMF-4^rHCOOO 


CO 00 CO 
00 00 M 

00 M HJ4 


M»0»DOOcDC4t^CD 

CDC3)COOMMrt<t^iO 

i-<'^0)Ot^OO00CD 


oOQwoMt^oor^r^O)’0'0> 

cDMcooocor-ot^r^OH}4 

t-HiOOOcO^COOOCO-^CDi-H 


CD CD CD 


^ O) 
C4 


CDCDCOM M-^M-*HC4Tj‘O0gCDQ-r‘ 


CO 


M CO 


O CD 
CO CO 
CD O 

CO ^ 
t-M 


_ c fl 
o ® 

•*^'0 «H 

'O G2 

•1-4 c> rsi 

•< 

'O 


Wv 

CO 

00 


8 CD O) lO CO 
00 CO O) 

l>0 o 00 00 

ID » H»4 O HH 


«DCOh-cDi-tCX)OOOcDOCDOcD 

CDCOOOi-hMiOIDCDOOcOCD^CD 

COOOOOOCCT!<,-«OOOt^OCOiO 

OeOOOuOt^OOiDiO^iDiDC^ 


»D M f-H 1-H ^ CO O CD O CO i-< 

^ CO i-H 1-H O CD O) M i-< 

C>»D>-4 CO ^ O 00 O ID 00 t^ 


O»^0)HjHD00M0>Hj«OO) 

lOCOOCOMl^r-t^iDcDi-H 

i-HOH}4cOr-OOCOMO)rr»D 


00 CO CD CO 

»D ^ 1-H O) 

O) O ^D 


t- CO »0 1-H CO 


»D 


I CO 1-H M 


1-H O H}4 

M CD 00 
M »D 


oorfooi-HT^r^oO'S' 
COt^i-Hrr'Dt^OOO 
CO ^ tH 

oT 


C4coo)^oooooor^r-co 

CDC04Dt>-CDCSC005000*D 
CDiDi-H 04 


CO »D 

S 


00 


\ 


b£fl 

C3 c3 

TJ OT 

p-^ >—4 

O C0 

w 

c8 


o 

kO 

M 

o 




CD 1-H ^ CO O 
M r- CO o CD o> 


t-0)OOCOHj4 

coiDi-ir-tHieo-.^-v-w^^_ 

ls,i-H<^0»DO)»DCOO)r«-0<N 

^ ^“<0 C4 mm'^ cp" CO M 


05 CD 
M 


^66coc^Tj4t>.^cOoo 

^ M w ^ ^ 


COt-Hj4 M M h-00 eo M M Hji f-H 

OOOt^ »-H-H fH. o M 05 O-M CO 

MOOCO »D 05 M M 00 00 CD 05 05 


b— 05 ^ 

S b-OMl^ 

CD t>- 05 O 


gJ050‘DM»DHf40> 


M *D CO O 
00 O M 00 


M b- O 
M oor- 


MMcDMg^g^g^O) 

§ 


rH.C5CO 
CO 05 

CD 


05 


1-H05l-H05l-H^^^CDgO 


CO 05 


CO 


88 
1 -H 00 

^ 00 
t- CO 


C3 

■4^ 

o 


s 


00 

CD 


»D CD M 1 -H 
COM tH, O 00 
*-• 05 O M 


t^^^COO5-HM00t-»DMO5CO 

tDl>-COHf4iDt^050»-<f'-OCOCD 

COHj*t>-COCDCDCOi-H05COOCO»D 


^t-00 
1-H CO CO 
1-H CD 05 


»D00 05i-4COHjirfiC-00 
^M-HO*-HC0t>^ 


OOMO»D»DO»D 


Hf«C04D05i—COHj*00 00 00tH. 

AcOOCDTficDcDh-.OOOOt>* 

MMOCOr-4MCO>^t<-«»'CO'^ 


00 -S* ^ M ID 
»D^^ 1-HM 


M 4D 00 1-4 iD CD M 05 M H 54 ti, n^i C4 ^ 

1-hM M O O O COh# 05 »0 CO 1>.Q O M 
^ iD^MM^MM M MCOi-H 


M 


^ ^ —H CO ^ —H CD 

»D CD CD 1-H O »D CD 05 iD M Q 
1-4 00 00 IDMMM 

•k 

CD 


CDt'-Hf4MC000^05000»D 
00t^r-O05MO00H»i(N^ 
rH 1 -HOT ^ 1 -H CO 


00 05 
00 t- 
CO 00 

r- b- 
M 


S4 


CD CO 
COOT 
o CO 

CD't>r 

00 O 


c3 

u 

o> 


CO 

Q 

D 

O 

3 

3 


CQ 
t- u, 
® to 
'O O 


a 

3 


Im 

04 


CO M 

•a^ 

W 


iS-gc)- 

® c3 ' ^ 
O ‘ 


'Ph 




__ CO Ch 


CD 

ID 

Ht- 


5D 

OT 

CO 

M 


Htf4 O l-H Htl 

r- CO 00 M ■'!»< 
o O 00 OT 

i-Tr-T of id" 
^ f— M OT 
CD 5D M CD U) 


iD00*-«h-*Mi-Hb-cOM»DOTr-CD 
»Dt>-O'^O'^00 00t^-Ht>-O*i1* 
OCt^’-H’i^'CDCOOOOOMCOt-OOi-H 

i-ToQiDCOOTOO^^Dt^odu^i-^ 

COScD'^COt'-QOCDOOHjiMOO 

Mi-HCOiDMM^^COi-HtDOTOO 

m 

CO 




CO 

Hjl 


CO 

OT 

t- 

M 

fH. 

M 

© 




OT 

© 

© 

fH. 

CO 

CO 

© 

r- 

© 

Hj* 

Ht* 

© 

CD 

OT 


CO 

© 

OT 



© 

00 

00 

l>- 

HJ* 

Ht* 

© 

M 

l>. 

CO 

© 

fH. 

© 

M 

© 

tH. 



© 


H»4 

0 

OT 


M 


© 

M 

© 

CO 

M 



OT 

© 

CO 

© 

« 



t>. 

© 


© 

M 

pH 

h- 

rf 

M 


00 


© 

00 

© 

t-- 


© 

Q 



tH- 


© 

M 

tH. 

© 

M 

© 


© 

©“ 

© 

iD 


0 

M 

h- 

hH4 

M 

© 

00 

rn. 


M 


OT 

CO 


Ht* 

OT 

<P 

^4 

© 

© 

© 


© 

CO 

© 

CD 

CD 

OT 

M 

© 


OT 

© 

tH. 

00 

© 

CO 

© 

© 

OT 

t- 

© 

tH- 

© 

M 

OT 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

OT 

CO 

0 

CO 

t- 

* 


M 

0 

M 


m" 

0 









CO 

0 

H»* 


0 

0 

CD 




»> 

r-» 




«o 

CO 


r** 















M 




M 


iD 

on 

© 


h- 

00 



M 

© 

■n* 

fH- 


M 

© 


© 

CO 


© 

© 

M 

OT 

t- 

© 


Hit* 

0 

iD 

t-- 

© 

0 

0 


0 

© 

OT 

r- 

on 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

'X 

© 


HlJI 

© 

r- 

© 

r- 

CO 



CD 

© 

© 

OT 

© 

00 

CO 

© 

M 

M 

CO 

t-- 


tH. 

OT 

CO 

© 

OT 

CO 

© 

05 

M 

© 

© 

M 

OT 


© 

© 


Ch. 

CO 

© 

■n* 


H}4 

h- 


c*- 

© 

© 

CO 

0^ 

© 

OT 

Tt* 

pH 

© 

Ht* 

Q 

"ot 

0 

CD 

f.'S 

tH. 

© 

© 

Hf 

M 

■Hf* 

© 

tH- 

CO 

© 

00 

OT 

© 

© 

© 

OT 


9^ 


M 

M 

1- 


CO 


0 


Chi 

M 

© 

c- 

OT 

M 

OT 


CO 

CO 

M 

© 

■Ht* 

CO 


M 

© 

© 

di5 

© 

Ht* 


OT 



<D 

»-H 

% 

3 

1.4 

<s> 

a 

O 


IS ® 

OS 

^ <D 


CD 

05 

CD 


iD 

tH. 

CO 


M 


CD »D CO tH- »D 

CO r- HJ4 10 HJ4 

t- CO »D CD 


00 


CD CD OT M 
M M CO Tt« 
CD CO »0 CO 


McOCDi-HH^OTCDMoOC-tD^rt* 

r>-'^Hj40M»Deoooor-cDcoi-H 

O»Di-HOi-^M00»DiDt^^M00 

t>riDOTt^O»Di-roOCOOO 
^^CDO0P*Dg'3'O:^ 


00 

O0OT->. ^ •. y- , — ^ 

i-HCOCDtH.tH.t^OTCOr-MO’^t- 

CO 1-H 1-H 1 -^ 


00 


M 


CO M 


M 


S.2 

S 

Sh 


Q 


M 


iD 

o' 

O 


00 CO t-. CD CO 

S CD CO CO I'- 
00 CO OO 05 


COiDCDCOnficOcDCDi-HOCD'^iD 

CO»DOOCDOOMOGOcOiDiDCDiD 

OT^OTiD»Di-Hi-HiOCDM00i-HCO 


•^-hOT Hji cDO O M-h M M O 

OTi-iCO tH. M-H O iD CD hJi M 

rt* M OT CD 00 CD r»4 M CD CD Hji M 


OOt^OOOt--i-Hr-i-HMHj4 

i-HeOOcDOTHJ4tN.MMi-Hl>« 

OOTt-OTi-H-^iDiD00a0»0 


CD Hji OT 
iD05COt'- 
00 1-H CO OT CO 


85 


r-i-Ht>.cor-CDt^M00MHj4iDCD 

OOiDcDOT-^O-^Ht't-OTMOt^ 

CDCOiDHj4COt^cDCO-^i-H'rI4ci5?o 


CO r- OT 

g o 

1 -H M 

» 

M t- ^ 



O OT rn- r- CD M CO 
OT CO CO -Tji 00 M HJ4 
iD 001-H t- t- 1-H 


00 


COOTiD-^r-OOOMMI^M 

OOCDOOOCMOTiDtH'^i-Hi-H 

HjiQOiDt'-.COrrOTOOf^OO"^ 

^ t-(i-Hi-h^i-hO»-hCO»D 
M M 


00 iD 
M iD 
t- CO 

OT iD 

1-H iO 
00 iD 

O 


CO 

OT iD 
M iD 

04 04 

iD r- 
CO iD 
CD 00 


<55 

H-i 

O 

£h 


t- 

1-H 

00 

iD 

CD 

M 


CD 


TJ4 CO O CO 00 
CO CO 00 <35 »-H 
t>.MOCOCD 


iD00M'^00MM00OTt--HiDO5 

OOTCOCDOOO’O'OOrPMMOTcD 

OOTi-HiDt>-COOTOMOCOCOi-H 


M 

M OO M r- M 
00 t- tH* ’4C t- 




MOTCDOM^’O'COT^^CO 


t'--*14iD-!POTt^OMC000t^HHM 

OOt^MMO’O'CDtH-MHji’^t'-i^ 


CD 


M M M 


09 

H>» 

o 

e 


CO 

iD 


CD 

HJ4 

00 

OT 


CO Tf4 CO CO 
Hfi OT CO M Tf 
OT 1-H O O CO 
^ ^ 
OT OT O O CO 

iD 00 Hf1 ^ H^4 

iD CO O M CO 


ts-Ot-‘^C5H^4#-HOTOOt-Ml-Hi-H 

i-HiDOiDCDOTMt^COi-40'^00 

MMOTCDOTe0MO’O*t'-i-HiD00 

cfoT—rM‘ciOHj4“cDMtHriD’T»4‘co'oO 
COi-HMOTiDOOOQCO'^MTfiM 
CDOOOOT‘itf<OcOOOOOt«-MOT^ 


M M 1-H M 1-H 


S’- 


l-H 1-H 1-H M M 1-H 


CO CO CO 


© 

M 

Hf* 

M 

M 



0 

pH 

CD 

Ht* 

© 

M 


rH 

M 

© 

© 

05 

© 

M 

© 

Ht* 

© 

Hf 


© 

CO 

© 

Ht* 

CO 

© 

pH 

© 

© 

© 

Ht* 

Ht* 


05 

M 

© 

M 

© 

S! 

0 

t- 

© 

M 

pH 

pH 

© 

© 

M 

© 

CO 

© 

CO 

HJ4 

M 

CO 

tH. 

Ht* 

05 

05 

© 

M 

© 

HI* 

»H 

OT 

CO 

OT 

© 


pH 

© 

t*- 

© 

© 

pH 

© 

'© 

o' 

0 

©■ 

m' 

h-T 

0 

on 

© 

CO 

t- 

©* 

0 

pH 

CO 

0 

pH 

0 

l>- 

‘5’ 

"ot 

00 

m“ 

M 

CO 

© 

•it 

05 

© 

p 

r- 

OT 

t- 


© 

h- 


© 

© 

© 

© 

05 

tH- 

© 

© 

© 

05 

© 

OT 

HT* 

© 

© 

M 

© 


M 

© 

05 

CO 


Ht* 

M 

© 


© 

© 

© 


pH 

Ht* 

© 

pH 

05 

^4 

r- 

© 

M 

© 

© 

r- 

© 

M 

r>- 

© 

© 

CO 

© 

rH 


<0 

pH 

M 

Ht* 

pH 

pH 

© 

© 

pH 

M 


^H 

pH 

M 

r-4 


88 

M 

Hf* 

©’ 

CO 

© 


0 


Ht* 

© 

© 

pH 

Ht* 

CO 

iH. 

© 

tH- 

fH. 

© 

OT 

r- 

© 

© 

© 

pH 

© 

© 

rH 

© 

© 

© 

Hf 

t*- 

© 

Ht* 

rH 

^H 

pH 

r>- 

M 

CO 

CO 

on 

tH. 

© 


on 

M 

05 

r- 

M 

© 

© 

© 

M 

© 

CO 

© 


M 

© 

© 

pH 

© 

© 

M 

CO 

t- 

HI* 

M 

pH 

© 

dh 

© 

t- 

© 

Hf* 


Ht* 

Ht* 

© 

^H 

Ht* 

M 

r- 

M 

© 


r- 


© 

CO 

© 

© 

Ht* 

© 

© 

pH 

OT 

pp 

pH 

© 

05 

OT 

pH 

M 

© 

t-- 

© 


© 


m' 

©“ 

00 

p 

OT 

© 

© 

t-H 

05 

© 

CO 

h- 

0 

h- 

tH. 

© 

pH 

pH 


© 

pH 

Ht* 


© 

© 

05 

© 

© 

M 

pH 

© 

© 

CO 

© 

Ht* 

© 

CO 

CO 

© 

0 


» 

OT 

© 

© 

00 

05 

0 

Ht* 

© 

© 

© 

Hi* 

© 

© 

© 

© 

M 

© 

tH. 

M 

M 

M 

M 

CO 

M 

M 

OT 

© 


© 

M 

9^ 

M 

© 

M 

M 


« 

© 

© 


© 

^H 

m“ 

P 

M 



r- 

P» 

M 

V 

05 


P- 










M 

M 




© 







a > 


OT 

o's a 

5 2 "‘C 3 

o* o,«2 


OT 


Hf 

05 

Hf 

M M M M OT 
© Hf* © t- M 
^ ^ OT M 1 -^ 

©■«^©©©i-hOT©OTi— OT©OT 
©©©©©t’-M©©©©OOT 
OTMi-H05Hf©05©©©M©M 

© © 1 -* 
© T-H © 
M 1 -H © 

©©©Hf©©©©© 

©©©©©©t-*^co 

t'-©©Ml-HOl-H©© 

©OT©bHMl'>-HH©HfC4M 

co©i>»t^©i-4©^-©r>-Ht* 

©©©©(^©MM-^t”-© 

r- OT 
»t’- 
© OT 

b- 0 
© OT 

© I-H 

P 

Hf 

r- 

© 

m'©'©'<3 ©“ 

1 -H © ^ Hf CD 
© ©© © © 

©©t’>-O5C-HfH!f00©©CO^M 

Hf©©05Hf©©00©t>-MO© 

OT © © 
1 -H M © 
© © © 

© © t- 06 © © ©’ © 1 -H 

©©©r-rHOMtH.© 

©©©i-4©©05OT© 

CO CD M'00 CD M CO © 

M©©M**fi-HM©M^rH 
©©OOHf©Ht*©©Hf*© 

M CO 
© © 
HH CO 

hH © 

© OT 
M © 

p 

Hf 

pH 

M’m'i-h M S 

1-1 r-i .-H M m" 1-4 co’HtTco 

tH^MM 

MM©©M05©’^© 
^ r. 

M 1 -H CO CO M m’ © 0 ^ CO © 

M i-H 
© 

MM 


*3 

a 

03 

•k 

05 

03 

H>> 

DO- 

pS 

•ii 

•2 ” 

'OS 

.23 

s 

p. 

09 

O 

o 

O 


Q 

Z 

2 

O 

z 

w 

;2; 


o 

Eh 


fl 

.3 P fl .. 

« oCQtd O W 

.2 S^^^Ph 


® fc- 

fliS?® ® 

S ^ t> 

p.fH .2 


'3 

»H 
4® 

'3 

*-H^ P 

Qjpp O 

P P '3 


O 

35^5 S"’ 

§ n « ® ® ^§o*:;coooc3o 
cppWizilz: fl |pqffiafesShJS:z:!2: 

o 
O 


M 

03 eO 


<D 
<y 

P 

O' 

■3 

> 

O 

Ui 

*3 

® fe'S 

«to S 
tuD a>^ 
P O OT 

-H ImI-H 

»- o ^ 
ta^'O 

s 


o 

H 

z 


H 

» 

)-3 

P 

P 


>» 


0) 


OT 


iZ ^ ® 3 ® o s: 

Iz; 



ce 

P'S 4=3 

^ Pi bfi 


® ® 3 

is-H^ 


2||.g 

fl p ot'3 

oS.t3 ® 


0) 
t 

C9 

PPP 

o 


I 

OT 

a> 


P 

H 

z 

H 

O 

H 

H 

P 

O 

:z; 


'3 


p 






s 


0 

wtfl 

® a 
®.3 •• 

• • ii4 P 

oOco.PWPsi 
.3 '3 

S 3 


S 09 

>> 

OT 

§■« 
> o 


99 


See footnotes at end of table. 




















































































































































































Table Amount of public and private assistance and earnings under specifiefi Federal teork programs, by urban area, 193^-—Continued 


ce « 


3 ID CD 

000 

04 CO CO 

3 00 04 05 ID 

ID 0 CD 

3 ID CO 

3r--kj*eor-04cor-3 

3 4 D r- M 

3 

lOO 

CD 3 3 00 

ID CO r- 

CO 3 CD 

CD 3 

ID M 0 

3 3 r— r— CD 

^H ^H Qi 

00 ID 3 

OOCDOOr-CDOCDr-3 

3 3 3 CO 

CD 

• CO 05 

3 3 04 CO 

CD r- CD 

05 t- 3 

ID 0 

04 05 W 

05 CD r- CO »D 

r-053 

04 3 GO 

-COCOCDOIDID3COCO 

ID ID 05 ID 

04 

1 3 3 

3 r— 3 3 

CO 3 05 

CD CD 3 " 

04*0 

3 ID 0 

r-xoo04 3 

00 05 05 

3 3 CD 

04 003333300 

CD CO go 00 


1 Ak 

1 04 3 

1^00 0510 

t-" 05 05 

3 3 

3 3 

3 3 

05 04 

coco *0 

3 3 ID 

CO 3 iD 3 ID 3 

00 


, ta CD 

04 CO CO 

3 3 0 

3 



3 

CO 3 

CO 3 3 

C^3 

3 


• 3 


3 3 






9 




1 




<o o »c 

«D 

•-H 04 


9 

o 

a 

eS 

.2 

Vi 

s 

•D 

3 

A 


e 


03 

o 

o 

a 

CQ 


a> 

x: 

o q 
<1 


w CO 

03 

O 05 

O C4 
CO »-< 


«0 -H o 
00 cc 
05 O ''C* 

odt^of 


o o 

05 »0 1-H 

cor^oo 

^ 04 


’Tt*t^<OC005Q005lCt^ 
CO<OCD05t'-05r-tCOUO 
0 ^* 00 »-HCOi—tCO»C 

•^‘‘’rr‘oo*o‘r-rt>rrjro^ 

^’^»Or^CO04 C004 


s 


O 04 
CO 05 

o «o *o 
CO 


^ 

f-H COC^ 
rH 



olg 

0004 
CO CD 04 
CD ID 04 

00 3 
00 ID 
05 CD 

or- 1 - 

04 CO 05 
^H ^H ^5 

04 04 0 'CO 

2g5a ig 

CO r- 05 

0 3 0 
0 3 10 

00 05 3 
r- CD 05 
ID 3 00 

30C005r-iDiDr-iD 
»DCDO5O5COCdC03Ci; 
r-05»D00 04 00 C505iD 

CO coco r- 

CD CD 05 t> 

r- 01 CO 04 

1 1 

t 1 3 ID 

1 > 3 CO 

1 1 04 3 

P CD 
P 3 
r-3 

1 CO 

iS 

I P ID 

:?ss 

0 04 r- CO 
3 r- 3 CD 

0403CD 

1- 

ns fl!2 

—H 0) 

< A^ 

© © 
ns 

ScoS 

CO ID 
ID 3 

✓ 

04 t-’ 

0 r- 05 '00 

^H ^H 05 ' 

CO 3 13 

3 1 

1 

1 

1 

r*^ 05 06 

3 C5 CD 
04 04 3 

CD 3 3 
CO ID3 

C:3lD3CD3 3tHilD 
IDIDCD05COI^333 
04 ID 3 3 

0 CD r- r-^ 

iDCOOOO 

r— 

1 t «k •• 

1 1 0 00 

1 1 CD 3 

1 1 3 

1 ( 

1 1 

1 1 

1 i 

1 1 

cd'o 

*D3 

• 

1 T-H 

t CD 

1 

1 

I 

1 

1 

1 

ICOJO 

1 p 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

3 co"edo4 

© 

© 0 
bc a 

3CO 3 

CO 3 r- 

3 05 CO 

3 05 
3 ^ 
3 t- 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 t 

1 t t 

CO 3 ID 04 3 
3 CO CD r- ID 
CD 05 CO CO 0 

00 04 3 
0 3 05 
0 »D3 

t 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

■ 1 1 

O0CDCDIDO43O4O4O5 
04CDC0CD05 05C0C0O 
G03O04C0CD04C0r- 

1 1 

0 • CD I 

3 10 « 

04 t CO 1 

t 1 1 

1 1 ID 1 

1 1 CO 1 

t t 0 ' 

1 1 

• 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 

1 ID 

1 ID 

1 r- 

1 1 
t 1 p 

1 I 3 

1 t ID 

lilt 

1 1 1 1 

till 
III! 
1 t t 1 

« « 

JL •*-=* 

T? Vi 

3 

Vi 

W Vi 
© 

3 'odQd 

00 3 ID 
GO 3 

r-04 

1 1 1 

t 1 t 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

i 1 1 

1 1 1 

3 ' cd *D CO ID 
04 

0 3 ' cd 

00 CD 3 
04 3 

t 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

( 1 1 

1 1 t 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

o“ o’ 3 ’ 0 0 gd CO cd' p 

3COCDOCDC43CD« 
3 3 

3 • 04 1 

CO ' cp 1 
• W 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 t 

' t P I 

1 1 P 1 

1 1 r 

1 1 t 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 ) 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 

t 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

* 4 «. 

• 1 0 

I 1 ID 

1 1 

I 1 

t 1 

1 1 

1 1 

{ 1 

III! 
till 
1111 
till 
1 > 1 1 
till 
till 
1 1 I 1 


3 COCO 
CD005 
r- ID »D 

CO CO 

r- r- 
3 CO 

Q r- r- 

^ CO 05 

3 3 0 

ID CD ID 04 3 
CD CD ID r -10 

t- 3 CD CO r- 

r- 0 CO 

ID r- 00 
ID r- 3 

05 05 3 
CD 3 0 
05 05 r- 

cocoiDr-oor-cD33 
30505iC004g030 
CD0530000 0''CSCDOO 

\D 00 P 05 

CO 04 04 CD 

0 P 3 00 

1 1 

1 I CD ID 

1 ' t- CD 

1 1 04 3 

P CD 
P 3 
t- 3 

1 

1 04 

1 r- 
3 

ro OCO 

00 r- p 

CD 0 04 

0 04 r- CO 
3 r- 3 CD 
04 0 3 CD 

Tota 

CO ood 

3 ID CD 
3 3 

05 CD 


3 3 3 cd CO 
CO 04 0 3 

CO 3 3 3 

3 

0 Q 3 

000 05 
CO ID 04 

05 id 3 ' 
ID CD ID 
304 

3 CD ID 0 t- 3 04 3 r-’ 
304COr-iDCOCO300 
3 3 3r— 04 3 04 

cd p 04 ’ p 

05 r- 3 0 

©3 

3 

1 1 » 

■ 1 P 00 

1 1 ID 3 

1 ' ^H 

• 1 

1 t 

1 1 

1 ( 

1 1 

COO 
ID 3 

i 3 

1 CD 

1 

1 

1 

1 

t 

1 

odofrC 

04 

H^cd’cdof 


Vi 

•3 

3 

3 

o 

s 

3 

A 


CO 


03 
u 
<x> 

*3 

• 08 
^ bC 


O 

u 

Oi 


*3 
3 
3 
eo,i4 

3 O 

•S^ 

U 

cC 


''^'3 ^ «e 

■+J © © 

,?> CQ -4^ V 


— Vi 

.•3^ 
> b 

..H O 


B 

03 

O 

A 


p 

ID 

CO 


CO 

3 

3 

P 

r- 

CO 

04 

ID 

3 

05 

CO 

r- 

CD 

CO 

r- 

3 

3 

00 

CD 

p 

0 

3 

3 

ID 

•k 

t- 

3 " 

ID 

cd 

r- 

CO 

0 

P 

04 

p 

P 

3 

co 

00 

CD 

ID 

r- 

CD 

3 

r- 



O- go 04 04 CO IC 

04 O O 05 

05 t'- 05 00 


04 


04 05 ^ 05 
00 00 05 05 
05 1—I 1-H 

•k ^ 


f-« T-H OO 
tN. O © 
CO CO 

•-Tco 04" 


CO 1-H lO 
"^0^04 
^ 05 I-H 
#• 0^ 
rH ^ ^ 


t'-.coooo5wi-tr^co’^ 

O5CO*C'«5»*<D00»Ct^t>» 

»OCOO^OOphCO»-^»0 

t^coc^^oco'o^oi'coof 


^ CO 

04O05r-4O’V«0C0 


05-^^ 


04 


CO 00 04 


CO 04 


CD 00’^ lO 
^ CO CO 
I-H 05 o» 

•^C5"q 
1-H ^ »o 05 

»C 1 -H o ‘O 

•k 


0wt'-05 

^ ^ o ^ 
t-«t^o 0 04 

CD 

O-t-H 04 CO 

^ CD CO 04 


O 04 »-• CO 
CO -3* *-• 
3^000 

CD"04"'ifl?‘C0" 

COf^ 

^ CD 05 05 


04 


CO ^ 


^ CO o 

»-H 40 O 
0-000 

oTod^-T 

^ CD *o 
CD-^ CD 

04 04 


O O 00 ^ 
I-H CD 1—• 05 
CO 05 00 

o »o oTcd 

CO CD 05 
CO^* 04 


Ui ® 

o A 
^2 


© 

© 

'3 

t-4 

© 

3 

© 

o 


05 4D CD 
CO 05 05 
05 05 


005 CO 
3? »D ■ 
00 ID 




04 


pco 
00 3 
551- 

3 04 CO 
p r-3 
04 p r- 

POO 03 P 

r- 3 r- 05 CO 

00 04 ID 0 00 

04 P CD 
3 P t- 
ID3 00 

0 r- ID 
3 04 CD 
ID CD CO 

ID 00 
00 3 
ID 3 

04 CD 00 " 
3 COP 

0 00 

od 04 of 1-f 04 " 

04 CD 04 04 04 
CO 04 00 CD 3 

oo"rCco" 

3 04 ID 
PID04 

rf CD od 

3 ID ID 

00 r- p 


3 

P 

04 of 



t^OCOO«004t>-iD3* 

C0^3<0-^05»000i-t 

COt^CD»-l004C0053* 


- ^ O CD CO »-« 
- _ ID 04 00 05 O 

05iC003'C004COt>- 


1—I Q 05 00 05 
050iCt^04 


04 CO 


04 »D 1-4 05 
O 3< i-H CO 
CO CO 1^ CO 

cD' 1 - 4 " cdi-^ 
COOO ^ 3« 
CD 10 0 04 
». 

ID 


00 00 CO CD 
^ 10 04 1 -H 
»-H 05 CO 




04 00 05 04 
C5CO O- 
OOCO O- 

i-T 04 


CO 04 OCO 
O5r-ot>- 
1 -H T-H CO 

ID odoTf-T 
04 CO 3 * 1-H 
05 CD 3* CO 


05 05 04 
r- 04 i-H 
ID t>- *0 

i-h'05 CO" 
05 3* 1 —* 
3* 04 CO 


05 CO CD 00 
1 -H 04 CD 05 
04 04 corn 


3 CO ^ 


©.2 
fcri I—* 

U 


Q 


CO Q CO 
00 O 
CO 3 t>- 

Cr3«‘lD 
3* 00 1-t 
CD CD 04 


«0- 


005 
ID CD 
00 04 

•k 

00 ID 
C-OO 
31 CO 


00 00 3 
ID 05 t>- 
CD CD 05 

«k 

CO I-H b- 
CD »D CD 
tH i-H CO 


3 05 3 ID CD 
O 05 CO O 04 
CO ID 05 ID 05 

i-To ofiDod 

t- CO ^ O !>■ 


00 


00 3 


W i-H 04 »—< 


3 3 0- 
CC t-< CD 
3 O ID 

oTodiD" 

CO CD 00 
CO 05 3 

i-Tcdof 


04 CD 05 
ID 1-N »D 
3 00 

0"0 1-H 
t>- 03 
3 00 ID 


0-iDiDi—<00»—*^*D 
iDi-H3ii-H3*00O>—<CD 
C0C0300OC0O0-05 


Oi-icoor- 

CO 05 CD 3 ^ 


04 04 r- go 
g 05 C4 


1-H CO 1-H CO 05 3 05 


f-too^ 04 i-k ID ID 04 i-( 


CO 04 


ID 04 1 -* CO 
ID O CO ID 
i-H ID 06 1-1 
^ 

00 O- 3 1-H 
00 cor-CO 
o t- ID ^ 

I-T CDfH* 


CO cor-CO 

05 04 r- CO 

CD CO 3 t- 

CD t>^CO 04 
04 3 3 CD 

CO r- CO ID 


04 


CO 


S CO 04 3 

05 r- ID 
05 05 05 r- 

CO ID ^ 
O 04 1 -H 3 
t- 04 CO CO 

CO:: 


04 00 3 

05 r- 04 

3 CD ID 

3 ” CD 04 
ID CD 05 

ID 3 


00 ID ID 1-H 

SfSf2?g 

000 cT 
^-iD03 
CO 04 3 04 


CO 

o 

Eh 


04 ID 05 
04 ID CD 

3 3 r- 

03 04 
O ^ ID 


ss 


3 

3"' 


CO 


004 
■ 00 
05 

3 " CO 
CO CO 
O ID 

of 


04 or- 
iD r- 3 
05 CO r- 

iDodcD 


CO r- 3 05 ID 
CJO 3 o 05 CD 
1 -H 00 ID ID r- 

Q 04 " 04 " CD 3 " 
O 05 04 04 O 

W CO 3 3 O 


04 


CO 04 


CO COCO 
04 1-H 3 
0*D3 

•k 

GO ID 05 
05 CO 
3 t- 

04"cd"3" 


04 CO 3 
CD 2 04 


05 


3 




r- CD 05 
‘ 3 05 
CD 3 


85 


3iDCCi-hCD040C005 

050ooi-Hoor-iDor- 

CD3005005CDr-CO 


CO CO r- 

r- CO ID 

04 r- 3 


04 O 04 
o 


ID r- CO CO 05 

r- CD r- CO 05 


CO 1-H t-GO CO 04 ID 04 


r-r-04 04 
ID 3 3 05 
3 3 05 3 

‘2SS 

t- CO ID CO 


33 
3 00 
00 04 


05 

t- 

3 


a 


00 CO CO ID 
^ i-H ID CO 
04 3 CO CO 


CD GO 04 3 
05 CD r- 04 

o r-o 1 -H 

r- 04 ID CO 
04 CD CD ID 
CD 00 r-05 


3 3 f-H CD 3 


3:: 


3 r- CD 

feSS 

cc"cd of 

S 1-H o 
CO 00 

ID 04 


or-COO 

CO CD 3 CD 
3 04 00 CO 

of 3 " CD of 

r- CD CO 

3 0-3 


s 


C3 

3 

o 

Eh 


§S5g8 

ID CO O 

♦k 

3 05 CD 
r- 04 04 
05 04 ID 

CD 04 3 


3 00 
ID 05 

3 r— 
«! 

3 04 
ID 04 

r- CO 

CO 3 


CD 3 CO 
CD 3 05 
05 3 1-- 



CD 3 05 CO 05 
O 04 ID r- 1 -H 
t- CO 050 »D 

3 CO 00 of ID 
1-H O 1-H 04 O 
O ID 3 CD 04 

CO 04 " 3 CO 3 
CO 


O 3 go 
CO 3 04 
ID OGO 

CD 0004 " 


300- 


COiD CO 
CO iDr- 
CD 3 ID 


CO ID CO 
o ^ 


33i-Hr—iDOi-Hr-3 
OCD33IOCOOCOID 
O53cocor-coco3r- 

iDCOhh30^304^" 


o O 1 -H 05 
CD 05 05 o 


04 CD 05 . . 
04 3 CO CO 


00 CO ID CD 
CO 04 o 05 
O 04 CO O 

O4"cdodod 

CO 1-H 00 CD 
COIDCDO 


1-4 ID CO CO 
04 r- 00 CD 
05 O 3 1-H 

04 " 1 -H od o 

05 CO CO 04 

cor-oor- 


ID 04 


t- CD 3 
04 


00 ID 04 04 05 04 


CD 


05 


ID CD CO 05 
CO 05 1-H O 
CO 04 1-H CD 

t>riDofo 

CO « CD 
CO ID r- 05 

Ofi-fcD 3 


ID O 05 
CD CO ob 
3 CO 04 

3 " 3"od 
005 r- 
r- 1 - CO 

r-T wd 


o go 00 r- 

iDor-3 
05 3 M 05 

__•k 

O CO O »D 
04 3 04 CO 
05 05 04 r- 


-H © 


© 


T w 

o’lO c 

Eh 2 9 

» a.«c 


CD CO 3 

05 <C ID 
3 O 04 

3"cDCf 

g83S 

•s 

r- 04 3 


04 00 
04 CO 
t-OO 

CO 04 " 
CD CO 
t- CO 

•• 

CO 3 


00 3 CD 
3 CD 05 
04 CO 05 

04*04 r>f 
3 CO 04 

05 0 ^ o 

•k * • 

^ 3 04 


004 3 04 3 
04 r- CO ID CO 
CD 05 r-3 O 

#. 

04 3r—3r— 
3 1-1 04 CO 04 
04 ID3 CD 04 

CO 04 " isf CO i-T 

CO 


ID 3 3 
3 04 CO 
04 05 05 

»D r- 3 
r- 3 CD 
O t- ID 


r- o CD 

3 3 CO 
05 CD CO 

IDOO"CO 
03CO 
04 CO CO 


00 c5 


ID 


3 o r- 3 CD CO 


ID Q 04 04 3 3 ID 
04 Cb 04 00 CD CD 05 
04G0OC0C000300ID 

od CO o id" ID r-f odcd od 
coo^3r-r-t-05co 
CD053ID004300CO 

iD04 04"r'rcD3fi-rod»D 

3 04 


04 00 04 r- 
ID CO ID 04 
ID r- 04 CD 

*. ft. #k as 

00 3 r- CD 

CO 04 r- r- 
CO ID 00 O 

of of of 04* 


ID ID CO CO 
00 t- 3 ID 
3 OCO CO 

3 r- 3r- 

‘O CO CO 3 
t- ON t- 

0 CO CO 
CO 0 ID 
00 00 04 

03 00 
^ CO CO 
P 04 CD 

04 

p 

3 

CO ^ 0 3 
PCOOOO 

CO r- p CO 

3 3*odid 

CO CD r- p 

GO ID t- 0 

3 edod 
04 3 00 
00 oot- 

004 
04 p 
p p 



CD 3 3 p 

043 CD of 

r-T io 





a 

•k 

© 

3 

© 

3 

a «3 
§£ 
OT 03 

> g 

_ o3 

A 

© 

Im 

to 

o 

© 

O 


T3 

© 

a 

a 

G 

O 

O 


© *0 

H © 

a 

a 


a 

© 

O 

xi 

3 

u 

O 

z 


a 

o 

O 


© 

a 

© 

ns 

a 


o fl a 

a © © 

©Am 

§^© 
.a 3 l1 

a o ® 

^cqE-* 


Vi 
^ >1 
a 3 


>3 


a o 


o 


to 3 •• 

§ 
Vi 

a 

© 


© 


ceficQ 


CO © 

©^3 
W ©^ 

S 

© o 


ro 

ns 

A 

© 

Ph 

^ « 
7 ^ © 

- rn ° a 
2 O 


2 


© ©5 

- 


CO 

O 
A„' 

© 3 

© a 
a /2 * • 
af^-g 

-H , Hj 


>* 

3 


gPSw 

o a 


© 

© o 

G^M 
© • w 

fcH 


a 

o 


©'§1 
a 9 ®5'S 
o3%B 

© .9 ^ 'o © ^'o o Q 


iQ.S 

©X3 

ZO 


.22 



a 

o 

3 

tuo 

a 


o .. 

a ^ 

bC‘-H 

II 

1^0 


© 


a © 

gss 

S S o 2 © « 

©52 

©iS’E 

C3 - - - ^ 


© 

A 


flk CO 

3 g 

s § 


© 


© 

Sm 

© 


I- 

©.a o 

r\r\7I' 


Vi 


> 

o '3 <1 bi 

CO p [7 © 

■o- 2.2 o § 

&I1 

8 ® o 

oMp 


100 













































































































































































ro CO 

» «» 
CO 1 -i 


00 

ssi 

i>^cd 

cocs 


oo r*- CO CO 
o c» CO c; CO 
^ O >0 o o 

»-rf-r*oo^io 

»o »-< f-< 


^ CO c*- CO 

•o^ooc^o 

Cd CO CO 

oodc<r»^ 
^ o> ^ 


CO »0 CO C^ 00 

^ O O CO CO C« CO »o 
OO COCO 00 1-1 


»0 M5 CO 
CO tc CS ^ 
CO 




38 


»o 

»c 


<0 

1 

0 

a 

1 

CO 


• 1 

rO 1 

Q <0 

kO 

1 

44 04 

1 

CO 


> 04 I 

S CO 

0 

1 

00 

1 

CO 


• 44 1 

OJ 0 

00 

1 

t 

of CO 

1 

1 

cT 


1 of ! 

CO 0 


1 

CO 

• 

04 


1 04 • 

4^ 


CO 

kO 

0 

t 

1 

1 

00 

1 

, 

1 

CO 

CO 

CO 


■ 0 

• 04 

1 4N 

1 

1 

1 

0 CO • 1 

CO CO 1 > 

04 0 • 1 

cor4-«‘4j-ooct-Q 
i-«kct4C5i—«oeoo 
^04r-04 040C4kO 

CO 04 
t3r CO 

00 05 

00 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

of CO 
CO -A 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

8 


1 A 

• 04 

• 04 

t 

1 

1 

1 

t 

1 

• 

A A 1 V 

COO I 1 

4.1 1 1 

1 1 

COCOOfcOOf4ftOor 
COCOOQOCOCOt'-kO 
0 0 ^ CO 05 kO 04 

t-fco 

CO 04 


1 


C 

1 


9 

1 

1 

• 

1 

• 9 

1 1 

CO 44 ” 



C4 kO -O' i-H ic kO 

C5 CO oco o 
^o^o&oc5 

o cf^-^kO 


CO CO CO 
CO 1—« 


0> CO 


CO 


»“<O5C0i-'t^'^^kO 

C^OCOCOC^O’^'^ 

00»000'^'^0^»0 


ss 


s 


g C«-« 05 tN* 
05 CO CO 05 
CO 


■ CO 


05 

05 


CO CO t'-00 05 CO 40 
O 05 o Q kO Q 05 00 iij* 

■v »cocc5 t>»«o 05C^ 
•^orci’koocrkcoo oco" 

05 CO kO »—O ^ 00 C5 CO'^' 
»c »0 i-< W ^ CO 1-H 


CO 05 
■ ■ 00 

kc 


§3 


CO CO 

CO «5 

05 CO 


I0t^05 
05 CS CO 
CO CO 

lOt^Q 
00 00 kO 
00O5t>. 


»C 00 05 ^ 

»0 ^ kO t>- O 

CO o »c cq 

CO CO 0^0 CO 
^ 05 

CS 05 CO »0 


»C CO 

CO CO o o5 
i-< CO 1—t 

oTr«rCO ® 

00 CO o o 
t>* CS CO 


O5kOC^'>^00O5^C^ 
COOkOOOl—'CO^-^ 
i-(COCOt^CO'!f''«J'C<l 

G^Oi^cS^CO 

t*« CO ^ 05 00 O 
1-H kc CO O’* 1—IO 

«k «k 

O ^ CO ^ ^ 


8 

CO 

CO 

CO 


04 

05 

00 

00 

00 

of 



22 

p 

0 

t- 

00 

0 

05 

k© 

0 

C-4 

»© 


0 

4J1 

0 


04 

CO 

CO 

CO 

t- 

00 

CO 

l> 

t- 

C4 


CO 

04 

04 


0 

CO 

00 

r-4 

00 

4H 

co 

00 



44 


t-f 

05 

cd 

00 

0 

t-f 

05 

CO 

A 

05 

cd 


00 

0 

oc 

k© 

k© 

CO 

•A 

CO 

CO 


00 

4 ^ 

k© 

0 ^ 

cc 

C4 

-A 

kO 

04 

CO 

CO 

k© 

CO 

9 

CO 

05 




k© 


05COCO^COOOCOCO 

coi-Hco®or^cooo 

'nC-C^COOOCOOJcOt^ 

Q go CO CO iflj'CO Q o 
OC0C^C5^-0500k0 
OOC0C00500t^i-« 



•I 


^ ^ ^ 



00 


0 

04 

p 

0 


05 

CO 

00 

cc 

05 

05 

VO 

00 

k© 

05 

04 

k© 


00 

4^ 

CO 

•bC* 

90 

04 

00 

CO 

0 


C4 

0 

t- 

CO 

^4 

k© 

cc 

00 

00 

4H 

9^ 

CD 

0 

05 

0 


<0 

k© 


CO 

CO 


05 


05 

44 

44 

04 

k© 

00 

0 

C5 

o- 

05 

05 



CO 

05 

04 

44 

04 

00 


A 

»© 

cd 

of 

A 

CO 

A 

A 

05 

A 

t-- 

'cd 

»© 

A 

CO 

A 

0 

of 

t-r 

if 

cd 


of 

»© 

95 

0 

>© 

CO 

CO 

t-- 

k© 

04 

05 

0 

» 

CO 

CO 

'Cl 

4© 

CO 

k© 

<0 


•bC 

04 04 

CO 

IC* 

oO 

k© 

44 

44 

C4 

k© 

CO 

CO 

C4 

CO 


•bC< 

0 

04 

CO 


'A 

k© 

»© 

44 

0 

00 

i© 

44 

'j' 

04 

4»* 


05 04 •—1 04 CO 


CO 


05 

4J, 

8 

05 

04 

00 

CO 

g 

g 

05 

§ 

0 

C5 

I© 

k© 

»© 

k© 

CO 


05 

CO 

05 

CO 


4ti 

05 


h- 


<35 

CO 

»© 

»© 

05 

CO 

00 

r- 

k© 


<© 

k© 

GO 

CO 

t- 

06 

04 

05 

00 

CO 



05 






A 


A 

04 



^ O 05 04 
05 00 05 04 
CO 05 1-H 1-H 


kC COOO 00 ^ o 00t>- 
04 CO »C 04 O COO 1-H CO 
04 1-t 04 CO 05 kO O 05 10 


OOCOOO-t^.WOCOO 
C4COI-- — 05 04 04C0 
C0C0’^r-0-iC*O5C0 


o 

CO 


C4 04 


tN. 

^i-T 


CO CO 

t^co 

04 44 

04 CO t- 
44 r-- CO 

04 00 00 

44 OC CO o- bA 
04 -A k© C5 44 
CO CO 0 05 44 

CD 0 CO k^ 

44 kO k© A 

OO CO CO 04 

04C044440k©0504 
4405000C0 44 4HO 

oooscoAOicor-oo 

0 >0 

^ FA^ 

44 k© 

CO 

CO bijk 

04' 05 44 
»© 44 04 
t- CO t- 

44 04 44 k© 05 
04 CO »© 04 04 
44 -A CO »0 t© 

A k© 44 05 

05 05 Ot— 

05 04 k© k© 

05* CO 04 CO 0 p cd cd 
cot-c405k©26coo 

k©00COO4COCOCOt- 

0 ^ 

A 44 
k© t- 

A A 

44 04 44 

co" -1 C 4 ‘ eo' cd 

A A 

A t-j 44 ' A 04 CO cd 

A 44 


CO CO 
04 CO 
bA CO 

CO CO «© 
•gi 00 CO 

0 CC t- 

CO CO 0 0 0 
04 ^ 04 05 *© 

O- -A CO 05 44 

0 CO 0 » 

CO CO 00 CO 

O- CO 05 04 

COCOCOCOOOOOCOA 
O4kC00COO5O4ACO 
00 0544OC005AC0 

t- k© 
t-- 44 

k© 44 

k©cd 

05 k© 
CObA 

c 05 ' 

C •© -A 
t- CO t- 

ofeded OOA 

1- CO »© CO A 
44 A CO »© k© 

i© A CO *© 
pCSi-bOO 

0 CO k© k© 

A 05 'k© 0 C >^ CD'k.© 
C004A44gi44005 
05C5COCOCOt--Al-- 

i©^ 
05 44 
k©t4 


4H 04 44 

ed 44 04 cd cd 

44 4H tH 

A t -^44 a“ 04 ’cd t-Tco 

A 44 

i>of 


a 

o 

bM 

cS 
A 

CO . . 

"3 

.. o 

'“a 


a> CO 

S2S 

r". 9‘> 


gagisg*^ ^^Z- 

gQwOWM — ocb-T^OB 

2 S ^k^2 « •• o o E-p 0.2 c 

a S £f 

05 05 .£3 


u* 

OC^ 


o 

03 iS 

*3 3 5 
OcqE^ 


a 

o 

4.5 

a 

-< 

c. 


T3 

a 


..V ® 

5l§ 
ofn 


Q> 


0 

c 

hC 

0 

0 

0 

H 
• « 

2 

*o 

*5b 

fc4 


CO 

Q> 


t 

< 

Q 


•< 

E“ 

z 

o 


« 

‘5 

(m 

o 


CO 

o 

0 0 

co^ 
O 08 


o 

4.5 

0 


o 2 

2 ® «8 
p’r* b- 

Sfii^ 

« 0 0 
C8 03 83 
OQCQCQ 


0 


>k 

C5 

> BS 

Pg’^0 ies 

O ® bcs O 
'§a“.9|§ 

“o £5 « 
OOt>P 


0 

o 

0 

M 

0 

0 

0 

03 


'0 

05 


§ 

o 

o 

Ui 

£ 

Im 

o 

x: 

4.5 

1.1 

eS 


0 

o 

0 

0 

3 

0 

03 


£ 

a 

o 

Im 

05 

.c 

4^ 

05 

b« 

c5 


CO 

3 

45 

o 


83 J2 


CO 

b4 

a> 

> 

o 

(O 

b4 

a 

o 

bH 

9 

JS 

45 

® 

b4 

c3 

CO 


05 2 

■ •> 


c3 


00 

b« 

9 

0 

o 


9 

> 

*co 

0 


O 


•o 

05 


OS 

-ts 


>> 

45 

0 

0 

o 

9 

c 


CO 

45 

.s 

'9 

u 

e 

83 

b4 

to 

o 

b4 

Ah 

CO 

bH 

o 


> 

o 

b4 

o 

•m 

9 

u 


£ 

9 


0 

0 

o 

C5 


CO 

9 

45 

© 


© 

0 

0 

© 

a 

© 

b4 

© 

ss 

4.5 

© 

b* 

03 

CO 


© 

o 

45 

© 

4.5 

a 

*© 

I 4 

2 

'S 


CO 

© 

D. 

>* 

45 

bri 

© 

.0 


© 

o 

45 

CO 

© 

45 

a 

© 


a s 
§ « 


be 

o 

b4 

Ah 


b£ 

o 
^ Ah 

o 

CO © w 

O ® o 

n3 ©50 

> o > 

0^0 
0 b« 

0^ 
gj 83 ^ 


b« 

03 

> 

•0 

0 

© 

i ■ 

© 45 

Q 

£ts 

Ah © 

CO c 

tS| 

44 0 

50 '^ 


b« 

.0 


b« 

0 


05.^, 

sS 




fc- c 

0 w 0 

W— be 

.-N '0 •; 


fc, gfe ®&i 

K 

© 


wT! CO 

© © © 
b« 45 ^ 

S C3 C5 

4^ — ^ 

0 Ah ^Ah 


© 


fc- a 

o ^ 

>>T? 
Ih O 
O 4.5 
45 O 

b4 0 
*-• 

9 o 

'^p 
o 


CO 


0 

o 

•M 

45 

© 

b- 

& 

© 


© 

45 

X 

© 


© 
'O- 
0- 
0 


m 


© 
b^ 

© © 

■s? ^ 
© ® 

*© 

>-< 


Be 
2 ^ 

£§ 

■g«^g 
o P 

l§i“ 

s|25 

^ ©»0 
fo-sE^g 

© w *5 

§3o 

05 o © 
EE^ G.& 

c8 O 

a-da © 

©^ .K 

x: ** 0 50 
© 2 0 “ 


© 

.0 

45 

b4 

© 

'0 

0 

0 

-0 

© 

>> 

o 

a 

a 

© 

CO 

0 

© 

CO 

b4 

© 

a 

© 


0 

© 

a 


0 

0 


© 0 

0 © 
© 


73 2 

'S^g 


© 
w*C 
be © 

0 " 
© 

0 
b« 


a 


CQ 


2^ © ••‘is 
® eL'^ C g 

0 S' CO o ^ 

— S' ® '-S 

ju o ^ ^ .2 

©*^ Oit^ w 

-g«* 0 a 
i: £ ©.a S' 

5 © bea45' 
®’^= ° 
0 o © o 

fc-a ® 4^ © 

•2 g.a g m 
<i|® «a 

. 2 ® w © 

&« S'© & 
&©S22 

®S^ 2 Pi 

<0 45 ••4 

Wfl-ow-g 

"^5" g 

4545 p 


© 


CO 


'^3 


On 


Q 

I 4 

c 

0 

o 

k 

s 

*v 

QC 

ss 

«4 

0 

k 

tc 

0 

k 

Cl, 

k 

0 

2 

"0 


•k* 

k 

0 


«5 


k 

0 

0 

0 

o 

o 

0 

0 

Vi 

•M 

Vi 

Vi 

0 

0 

k 

•1« 

k 

a, 

0 

0 




0 

s 

I 

i 

u 

p2 

0 

H 


©« 

>2 
•r P 

b< rn 

Ah5 


05 

kO 

kC 

b. 

of 


oo^c^o 

cot>.t^ooo 

4HkCCOCO-^ 

^ _ •b •b «b 

00 kO O CO 
4g5 o« 


00 O ^ 00 05 

^ Q C5 t> 05 
00 ,© O 05 C) O 

oT^ofeo CO o 

CO -bt, 1-4 ^ 

00 


© 

© 

0 

© 

4.5 

.2 

CO 

a 

© 

3 

0 

Pk 


CO 

© 

p. 

>» 


© 

*© 

© 

a 

OQ 


© 

03 

45^ 

© 0 
45 — 

*0 05 


R 


& 


C» CO 0)^0 
00 S C- o 
eo^cot-c'i 


05 CO 04 CD 
t-Ocoeooo 
04 » 00 'I** 18< 


1-H »o CO r- 


05 o 05 04 
kO 1-H 


45 

0 0 
© © © 
Wi 

'o 02 

•4. © 

-tj P03 
© © 
*0 


S8 

4J1 

•k 

05 

00 

CO 

•b 

»c 

04 


t^QOQC-CO 
CO b4 ® 1-4 

^ CO 44 44 05 


o>4fi05^a&^ 
04 4J1 kO 04 CO 04 
»0 04 CO CO 04 44 


4fi CD 04^05 

<0 05 CO O 4H 


04 kOt-.t-.t^05 
04 cot-- »0 ^ O 

04 44 


05 

t- 

9 9 

be 0 

04 

83 03 

0 

0 w 

*aN 

00 

k© 

r\ Vi 
w w 

A 

08 

Si 


'**05 44co^r- 
04 CO 05 44 CO 
kO *0 4J1 r* C5 


05 

CO 

CO 


044 CO 10 
CO CO O CO 


© 

45 

© 


05 

00 

0 “ 

CO 


05 «-4 05 44 CO 
CO « 05 
to kO 00 44 

•b •b ffb •« at 

W5 4H 04 t- t-- 

cooeooo4 


04 05 04 CO t-04 
COOOOOt'-kOt> 
04 CO r-4»«04 

4^*‘ood‘oo coof 

kO bji 4H C4 kC 00 
CO 1 -H 04 04 1 -i 04 

of 


m 

0 

0 

0 


p 

0 

Ah 


© 

Ui 

© 

la 

is ^ 
® be 
0 © 
0 *1 
0ft 

CO 

be 
0 


0 

© 

a; 


c 

> 


“ 0 ^ -s 

g ®03-< 

^ o 


s 

*0 

CO 


t«- 05 l> CO C- 
CO 04004 

»OC0 44t>.44 


O ut) o CO 44 

t-- coo t-co 

44 w 44 



1 

• 

} 

1 

1 

I 



1 

1 

1 

1 

t 

i 

1 



1 

1 

i 

1 

1 

1 

__ CO 0 

I 

1 




1 

1 



1 

1 

1 


» 

t 

• 

• 




1 

1 

1 

1 





1 

1 

0 

1 

• 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 



4 

1 

1 

t 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 



1 

1 

1 

1 

a 

1 

1 

• 

1 

• 

1 




1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

• 





1 

1 

1 


© 

3 

b.1 

3 

b.) 

© 

0 

© 

o 


b © 
©;0 

^2 


CO 

05 

*. 

t- 

h- 

cc* 

S3 


kO t*-t--t-05 
04 00 44 CO 
OOCOCOO 

•• «b «b *b 

O 44 ^ 44 t-- 

COCOQCOOO 
00 coo t- W5 


»-H 00 04 —« CO 00 

4t, kO 05 kC 44 

44 o 1 -H CO 05 CO 

•b •b •b •b •> «b 

05 bji o kO 00 
04 t- O o 00 C4 
04 CO 04-«»* O-tfi 

«b 


1 

Direct 

relief 

$537,019,147 

601,441 

1,403,991 

409,943 

1,091,204 

423,631 

8,813,302 

383,306 

764,590 

895,981 

237,618 

763,869 


CO 

CO 00 0 44 0 

eo A 04 04 1-41-- 


A 

^ O- CO A 00 

AC0 00 04t-.CO 


05 

A 0 k© 00 CO 

A CO O- <0 k© A 

C8 

co' 

44 4© 44 04 0 

oofodk© cdof 


CO 

CO CO 44 04 44 

A CO k©0 04 05 

Q 

trf 

o- 

eot^oooo 

004 05 CO CO 44 

r' 

cd 

04 04 4H 44 4H 

44 44 04 44 04* 


r- 








© 

•4.5 

© 

6 - 


00 


00 

r- 

<5 


kc 05 05 04 CO 
CO 44 CO 04 
05 CO 44 r.. 00 

CO kO 44 co'-d^ 

coco 

05 44 44 CO 44 

«b Vb Ab Ab •b 

04 CO 44 04 44 


ko CO 4r kooc 05 
r» kO <0 05 04 kO 
cookooor- 

Ab Mb «b •b *• 

-kCOb-t^44kO 

CO c-o coyj CO 

44 CO kf5 CO 

Ab Ab «> Ab A» A 

44 04 04 44 04 


^ ©c- 

■^3 0 

s «u a 


© 

e 


kO 

I-- 

A| 

CO 

CO 

05 




»o 05 CO ^ CO 

t'-005 44 0Q 
oe4t-.’bji04 

04 44 CO '^00 
04 44 I-. CO 05 
o ^ 44 t-* 44 

Ab Ab Ab A, Ab 

COCO 44 04 44 


CO CO kO CD CO 00 
C4<OcOOOCkO 
kC kO kO O CO 06 

4-r co";^ 44* 4r ko" 

8 04 kO CO 
kOCO t- kC CO 

Ab Ab Ab Ab A A 

00 44 04 04 44 C4 
04 


0 

0 

© 

•b 

© 

© 

4^ 

OQ^ 

og 

o u 
'w <« 

^ a 
0 0} 

.2B 

2 

be 

s 

o 


H 


© 

© 


2 '^'C 

a^ 




'0 

0 0 •• 

© © CO 
44 4^ 

®±jkS»2k2®©®i3p®®®2 
apQWlz;^ g gmnofeiJ25 
0 
o 

o 



101 


See footnotes at end of table. 
















































































































































































c> 

? 

C 

•PN 

a 

0 

u 

Os 

0 

o 

c 

C3 

s 

.o 

V5 

M 

o 

ilk 

0 

h. 

1^ 

IL 

0 

S 

1 

• pi* 

S' 

K 

"O 

s 

V) 

•m 

t 

K 

o 

QD 


0 

O 

g 

0 

•w 

«5 

•m 

QO 

«5 

0 

Q 

•i^ 

h, 

a, 

e 

0 

o 

•M 

s 

a, 

<w 

Et 

3 

0 

s 

1 

• 

CO 

I 

U 

2 
es 

H 


<D« 

•n c3 
Ph2 


05 04 05 -Pt* 04 O tv 

1-/ 04 -•f 

4O»Otv'^i-<C005CDC0 

40tv0540050'<J*0^0504 

05 ^ 

40 or vH CO 

05 O 

04 CO P-- 

pH OO pH pH 40 

■•C* Hj* 40 

O O 04 « »© CO --H 

p-H CO 

p-<04F-»i0Oc0C0‘0tv 

CO’^i-H^C004400CDtvCD 

‘O 4D 

t- 04 CO 04 tv 

tv 40 

pH ^ CD 

05 04 O 05 

^ 00 

CO tv D4 40 -Pt* O 05 

004 Tt 

CDCO’^O'^COlvcotv 

CD’-H05’^CD'^0”rf'054004 


40 O 1-t 

CO tv 

CO o 05 

00 O 05 ^ 

40 CO oo 

CO C5'“cfofoo5 

ofco o" 

OC004COO»DCO»DO 

ti‘ci0~4O'cf CO’•*‘“‘0 CO CO of 

I'M ^ 

CD ‘O 05 04 CO 

04 00 

pH tv Oi 

O CD ‘O pH tv 

tv o’04" 

CO l-H 1-H 40 tv50 

I-H CD »-* 

jyjO CO •''t* CO 

tH T-* i--( tv04 0440p-‘ 

CO 04 

^ rH pH rH 



00 pH 

o o 



04 O 

4© 04 






CO *-H 




a> 

o 

d 

ce 

4-9 

CO 

*OD 

CO 

cd 

o 

d 

D. 


CO 

a> 

a 

>* 


03 

o 

a 

00 


a> 

o d 
*^;d 

< 


COO>CD»OC<50 
05 Tf CO O OO 
00 •-• CO C'^ •-« 

»oo 

i-H 


CO iO 05 

1:^<N r>. 
CO t>- 


CO 00 CO 00 
-s t'- O 
fs. lO c^ »o 


t^co t'* 


CO C^ 
CO 


05 

05 


^ GC 00 
'»5< CO T-t t^ 

CO "O’ r* o 


■^C5■^COO5'^00^-O0COCO 

C0i005.-t0Jt>.i0OC0Tj<C^ 

COCO<NOCOt^Tt't^i--(»000 


OO^O’^CO ’•C'CO CO O C<l b-00 CO CO CO 05 
•M OJ ^ CO C^ COo 

04 f-( 


04 *-( 
CO 00 

cs c^ 

O <N 
04 




O CO 

tv 

<N 05 

^ «k 

O 04 
CO rH 


^ fl d 

O O d) 

■^'O »- 

S2 
*< 9'-^ 

® o 
'd 


,-4 CO CO CO 05 lO 04 

uo >0 I-- t- ic ’•}* 00 
CO 04 04 CO 04 

CO ‘O'oT of 

tv 04 IC CO CO 'Tf» 


OOOSJTv O COCO CO CO O CO CO 
rv CO f-H 00 CO CO Tt< 05 05 tv 
400505 04040000tvlvco04 00 


00C0C0OC004tv05C004tv 
OCOCO'-H-^tv^O'—'005 
C0CO0-»C5504G0O4O4tvO4’-H 


40 05 OO tv CO 04 O OO tv CO 

C4f-«05 C0'^*-<c0‘00»000 

04 CO CO 04 t-H ^ 

05 


00tvrt«c0tv»o05»0‘0c0 
CO‘0‘Otvtv0504COv4COCO 
CO CO ' I—t 04 


tv uO 04 F-' —' 05 00 04 05 
OOCD O ^'«C* CO 00 CO i-f 
40 00 ■^C0T“05tv 0CO5 

CO-^ C0’-Hi-hC 005 »Otv 

04 40 CO 40 CO 

05 


00 OO GO 
00 CO CO 
04 O 40 


CD 

CO 

CO 


00 

tv 

tv 


40 1-^ 04 
tv 40 CO 
CO 04 •tJ* 


05 


CO 


s 

o 

o 


tv 05 1 -H 
40 04 00 

-^fOCC 
CO 04 CO 
04 CO r-« 


® 
O O 
bed 
c3 ca 

'd w 

I—I 

O C0 
c/5 
CO 


s 


^ tv r-« 40 40 40 05 

tv ^ tv o ■•c* 00 

05 05 r-l tv 

t^ of *-f ctTof of of 

40 CO CO 40 r-H 04 
04 04 04 04 


04004 05 O tv 00 04 rt O 

04tvtv CO-rf CO i-t-Ft* 05 04 04 

T}^ CO 1-t CO 40 00-H O CO 40 O O 


05i—(•^COtv40T*<0040 C040 
COt—'F-t04O’—'tv40»000 
tvcOr-H4O00tvtv«;o-^GO00 


40 05 


4ocoeo»occoco‘0co 
tv04'«J<C004O»-<C0i-l 
CO 40 04 1—( »-i 


04C00400tvC0OC0Tj<cD'p^‘ 
COCOCOCDC005Tt<04C00904 
r-4i—irHO4i-H’-'00COO4O4'^ 


r-( o O -^05 

O "ct^ tv ( 04 1—I 00 

tv oO 00’•C' OO 00 

COi-TcOCCOf 04"of 
tv 04 tv 05 

^ 04 vH 


40 40 04 04 CO 
CO O 04 vH —• 
40 CD tv CO 

40 oT icf oc'‘O' 

O 00 CO CO 04 
04 


1-^ 05 05 
-pj* ‘O *-» 
tv CO 

CD-CP of 

i-t C5 ’•C* 
^ CO 


03 

•4-9 

O 


00 05 O CD tv o vH 
04 04 CO CO CD tv tv 
O C5 00 00 CO tv 04 

tf" of CD 04" p-f cT 
CO 00 05 05 CD 00 *0 
04 04 CO 


CD 

Tf* 

00 

04 



00 


CD 

04 




CO 

TM 

04 

05 


05 


CO 

CO 

JO 

05 

CO 

CO 

40 


05 

04 

CD 


no 

on 

on 

r-^ 

40 

o 

04 

Tt« 

CO 

05 

04 

t- 

CD 

CD 


00 



CD 

tv 

40 


r-H 


o 

tv 

40 

Tt< 

CD 

tv 

tv 

o 

»o 

04 


Tj« 

o 

40 


tv 


T- 

40 

on 

CD 

CO 

00 

o 

o 


o 

tv 

CO 

CD 


CD 

00 

CO 

CO 

05 

40 

tv 


tv 

O 

05 

04 

CO 


TP 

CO 

CO 

T}» 

‘O 

CO 

40 

00 

oo 


00 

CO 

CO 

tv 

04 

05 

tv 

04 

o 

>o 

00 

4C5 


tv 

CD 

o 



00 

of 


o 



00 

■« 

05* 

»• 

tv 

t^ 

cT 

00 

tv 

•* 

CD 

CO 

Id 

05 


of 

"cD 

lO 


CD 

tv 


CO 

40 

40 

04 

OO 

o 


Tt 

40 


05 

tv 

00 

40 



Tf4 

tv 

tv 

tv 

04 

o 

CD 


tv 


tv 


04 


05 

04 

tv 

CD 


04 

CD 

on 

tv 

04 

O 

04 

CD 

05 

tv 


40 

tv 

o 




04 

00 

CO 

CO 

04 

CD 


04 

CO 

00 



05 


04 


tv 

04 

04 

04 

04 


04 

CO 

04 

CO 

tv 


CO 

TJ* 

tv 

Tt 




04 

04 







00 





CO 

tv 

CO 


04 04 


W 

'O 

d 

B 

o 

pd 

S 

pL, 


ca 

® 

'V 

® 


c/3 

a 

ut 

® tU3 
T3 O 

Ut 


d 

d 


Pp 


CO pi4 

bo 

d <=> 

d 

Iv 

ca 




s:fc 

•«—»-uj> 
o cei> 

ji ® 

^ PppCl 

O-^ 


o o o o 

S ooo 
ooo 


ooo ooooooooo 
ooo ooooooooo 
ooo ooooooooo 


ooooooooooo 

OOOOOOOOOOQ 

ooooooooooo 


OO OOOOO OO ooo 
OO OOOOO OO ooo 
OO OOOOO OO ooo 


OOOOO 

OOOOO 

OOOOO 


OOO 

OOO 

ooo 


05 CD 5 ^ 


‘O tv CO 


OlvO 
Tt* tv 05 
<0 


•-H D4 CO 
C4 05 CD 
40 ‘O CO 


tvtvi—itvCO^COC4CD 
COt-^O*—< 4CCDCDC3C’^ 
eO‘D'-'C5D4tvp^r-fr-< 


tvCOtvCDt'Tf'C^C^CDOO 
'p?’'«»«»-HCOCDtvD4GOCOTj‘CS 
■^'l^‘404CCDtv05tv^.—*0 


CD 04 

PH 40 cd’ CD’ CD 

05 CD 

M" tM 40 

40 Hji CD PH tv 

CD 04 CO 

^ o 

p-i 05 05 uO O 

04 tv 

40 40 pH 

40 o tv tv oi 

40 tv 40 


C4 


C4 

CD 


r- 


04 


04 


CO 

40^ 


tv CD 05 tv CD 


CO 


04 


CD CO CO 04 

of 


w d 
§ 

^ ^ 
r’® be 

2 

Pm 



Work 

relief 

05 CO tv 05 O Tt< »o 

CD CO 04 t» 40 40 pH 

O pH CO 04 40 tv »0 

CD Tt* t 
04 00 1 

OOO ‘ 

CDtvCDCOCO05C0CD4O 

C0OCD40C0hhC0t}Hph 

C44OC0HHiOt-pHCftcD 

05Tj»05 04tv-««t<OOpH05 04»0 
C0Otvtv00cD04pHCDC0Tr 

40 40 00cDtvCSOC0t-OC^ 

CC 40 

tv tv 
O tv 

pH lo »0 05 

p^ 09 t— 05 pH 
pH CO pH 05 tv 

00 40 

O tv 
05 GO 

C5 00 CO 
C5 Tt 40 
tv 40 04 

CO Tt' tvTjt 00 
PH o O O CD 
04 O 40 to 04 

O 40 Tt4 
O 05 40 
lO 40 CO 


PH C^of C4 ti'o cef 

CO O CO CD tv 04 tv 

04 GO CO CO 40 O Tj< 

CD04 « 
O CO 1 
pH 04 » 

04'‘od'40'c^04~pH O5'tv‘o’ 
C00000tvc004i-Hc040 
00Tj<»OpH00tvO4cD4C 

oopH‘pfcrtfo6'c4"t>rofcr4cr 

O504pHG0C0tvtv'»s<O5pHCD 
40’^40 04Tf40c004cDcD04 

CO 00 
Tj< pH 
tv CO 

pv pH 00 40 05 
CO 04 pH CO CD 
00 CD '-f CD CD 

CO o 
40 CO 
05 04 

05 C: tv 
tv CD tv 

40 o o 

pH 40 40’ Tt< tf 
tv OC o 00 

tv 04 40 04 

04 CDTfi 
CD CO 05 
CO CD CO 

90 

•S Vh 

pH PH PH 04 04 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

of rr' 04" of pf 

CO Tf-' p-T 

of 

of 



CD 

pf CO of 

® 

pfH 

® 


00 CO tv CO 40 O CD 

40 CO CD 05 tM CO CD 

04 00 05 40 « GO TJ4 

40 pH 04 
t- pH 05 
tv 05 

CD05*'^<r-Tt<C0C005tv 

CD05i0rvOC0Tj^>^C'4 

CDOtvOOO'«J'40tv 

OtvCOOcD05 04COOOtvCO 

05C5005tv0005pH!Mtv 

Otv»OCOCOpH'i^50tv'^CD 

O 05 
th rj< 
CO CO 

05 pH lO CO »o 
00 CC p-> 00 40 
CC GO CC pH 05 

CD 40 
05 CO 
tv 05 

tv 40 CO 

CC OOtv 
05 00 CD 

CO CD 04 O 04 
04 04 05 O O 
CO CO 00 05 

40 CO CC 
O tv 40 
05 O 40 

Ih 

pH 

tH 

Direc 

relie 

pH CO tv tv 05 O CO 
pH HJ* CO 40 05 S 04 
tv CO 40 04 O OO 05 
^ .... 

04 pH 

40 05 CD 
TtJ 04 CD 
W CO 05 

CO04CDpHCOTj<pHtvCD 

COtvC005tvCCCD050 

CDtvO0O0O0PHTj<O0Tj4 

40^pH40C'40tfTfC005CO 

40T-|._(FH■T^T^<OCC05C5T^^ 
'^40 40tvHj-tvtVi-HCOpH04 

oo 

O 04 
05 t- 

CO tv Tf« 40 CO 
CO 40 TT O O 
tv CO 04 oo CO 

C4 rh 
tv 04 
40 CD 

ooo’05 
p- tv ^ 

CO 04 CC 

40 04 00 40 

o o 

tv' CO 05 
O PH 04 
05 O O 

® 

d 

® 

O 

o6 1-H 

CO CO »0 04 ^ 

PH O 

pH 

of pH 04 OJ 04' 04' 05* pH 04 CD 05 

CO CO 

o 

40 

of 



^ rH CO ^ 

pH OtT 


tv 04 04 40 Tt pH 

04 O 05 t- 05 pH OO 

CO O *0 00 tv CD 05 

pH 40 04 
O 05 05 
40 40 05 

04CDOrt004c04004 

000404T».QOtv05Tf 

05CDpH0440tv40Tj<cO 

05pH04 04 C0C0OTt<tv05C0 
04000cDCOtvC00004004 
cccocoo'^cOTj<OTrTf05 

00 Tt* 

pH 04 

O 40 O 00 Tt 

Ot-Otvtv 

O 04 Tt PH CD 

HJ* O 

OTt- 
tv 00 

CD CO CD 
00 CO 04 

tv Hj* 03 

05 O 05 Tf< O 

COCOC5 0tv 
CC CO OC CO pH 

40 pH 04 

O tv pH 

HJ4 CD 04 


1 

Tota 

*4 »4 

04 tv tv 05 CD pH 04 

TJ< o —' tv 00 o 

05 pH 05 CD CD 00 Tj* 

PH 04 CD 
40 CD CD 
CO »0 05 

i0004Tj<ufi0040tv' 

05CD04CD04COOC040 

Tj'04Tt<Otv00CD4005 

COCDCOCDCOC005 04C00500 
40C0040504C4tvC00500 
005005C5 COCOtj<OC040 

CO 05 
CO 
CC o 

40 05 04 PH CO 

CO tv CD tv tv 

40 CS CD Tt 05 

CD 40 
04 00 
4*0 00 

O CO CO 
05 TJ^ 04 
pH 05 tv 

CC tv 05 CO CO 

on 40 OC 04 o 

05 05 40 pp 00 

O 05 hC* 
tv tv C4 
40 CD TJ( 


•4 «4 •. ^ *4 

PH pH PH CO CO CO 

00 pH 

pHCO’-H0CpHtv-^pH04' 
04 Tt 

pH 

C0pHC00404C0C040C0cdO 

CO PH 

CO pf 
CO 

^H ^H pH 

04" 

04 pH 

cfpH CO of 

04 

CO CO CO 



lO pH Tt* 00 04 Tj* 04 

40 CO 04 O CD 00 40 

CO 05 tv pH CO 04 

tv 05 O 
tv lO O 
05 04 00 

Hj»tvpHO4T}<00 00CDCD 
T}<00C0tvO40 04 O4O 
04050tvc004C04004 

OtvCD’^04Tf*0500 C004pH 
T}<040pHpHCOOtvC5pHlO 
C0^40»OC0tvC540tvOtv 

tv O 

O tv 

04 40 

CO O pH tv CD 
O CO O 40 00 
00 CD 00 05 00 

O pH 
40 05 
CD 40 

Tt* pH T»< 
tv O CD 
O 40 TC* 

O 40 05 CD 
04C0q5pHtv 
40 OC 04 o tv 

COO"^ 

tv pH tv 

Hj’ CO CO 


as 

■4H 

o 

&H 

*. *4 *4 W. *4 »4 

0 40 0 05 00 05 0- 
CO pH TJ< CO tv CO Tf« 

CO CO CO tv OCD 

O tvGO 
40 04 Q 
04 O S 

C0pHCC05tv05pH^CD 

40C00004COCOC4CD04 

05CD»0040COtJ405CO 

G005CD40pHCD40C040TfpH 

■'^tvcDOC0pH04C0pHC040 

tv40tv0500’^OC005Hj*04 

CD"oC 
05 CD 
CO PH 

tf of CO of pH 
CO CO CO tv CO 
TT O 05 Tf tv 

Tt"04" 
CO CO 
pH pH 

40 CD tf 
pH Tt^ 
40 pH 05 

C/fcf CC CO 4cf 
CD 40 O CO 04 
Tt CO CD rt O 

tf of pf 
00 05 o 
tv CD o 


04 pH 04' Tt 

CD PH of 

p. ’-'f. 

•4«4^«4^*4«4*4«4 

pHCDph0CO4O54OphCO 
04 F, F, F- 

CO of c*f e/f c^tiT tf c^co oef CO 

Tf «(»* PH 

Oph 

tv 

04 04 CD 04 PH 

CO pH 

04 pH pH 

40‘ 04 Tt 04 pH 
04 

^ O GO 

^4 


^ ® 


® 

•4^ 

03 


OQ 

^5 


©•S o > rl 


Tf CO CO 04 TJ4 T»« 05 
<D CO 40 05 pH pH CD 

CD CD CD 04 CD pH 

GO pH 
pH t- 05 
O Tt< 04 

05 04 00CD40pHtvC405 
40 phhh<C 4004«DCD04 
OCCO'^OOtvCDOOOO 

4OTt<4OO5pHHj/cO00tvpHC0 
tv40tv40 40 40CDtv4005pH 
T}<OTj’05Tj<PH05 05tv400 

CD p- 
04 04 
rf tv 

40 05 CC 05 
tv 40 CO tv 40 
CO O 00 CO o 

09 pH 
04 Tjt 
O CO 

CD 40 

00 Tf 04 
CO »0 Tj* 

pH CO O tv 05 
CO CO 04 pH CD 
CO 05 04 TJ4 04 

04 Tt< 09 
C4 05 pH 
O pH 04 

CO CO 05 05 O 05 CD 

CD pH 40 40 CO O CO 

CO eo CO tv pH »o tv 

co'eoo5 

CD 05 pH 
04 O 40 

CO'O'CO 04 tf 40 05 tf 
GOO5C0TtHj<t-.CDC5CO 
O5004OO4 CCOtJ<O5CO 

c^ooof4rrofo"ofc3d'Tttfpf 

40 0500pHCD04050Tj<OOtv 
tv4OtvO300Tf<»OCD05Tji04 

tf 04 
04 05 

40 PH 

Tt CO 04’ 40 40 
pH 40 00 

TH pH O ’•t^ tv 

tv pH 
Tt tv 
fH pH 

CC’ CO tv’ 
Tj- 04 40 
40 pH 05 

Tt CD 05 Tf4 CO 
40 o CO Tj* 

CD CO CD O 

40 04 Tt* 
CO O O 
OOOpH 

Ofpf04' 

CD pH 04 

P. ^F- 
F— 

pHCDph04 04 05»OpHCO 

CS 

cooieocftco’^i^tfc^cood'co' 

^ ^ fH 

pH pH 

tv 

«o 

of of tv" 04 PH 

CO pH 

04 pH f-/ 

40" of tjT cf pf 

04 

i-< 00 


d 

•4 

® 

•4^ 

<a 

-<•9 

CQ^ 


d 

o 

CO 


& 

® 

Iv 

03 


> 9 

•g. 

tm 

ta 

s 

o 


73 

® 

d 

.9 

•M 

d 

o 

O 

1 

n 

2 
< 

o 

H 

Iz; 


® 

d 

d 

d 

o 

O 

C/} 


® 

00 

d 

,d 


d 

.o 


73 

»l=i 

slfll 

as 


® 
o 
d 
® 
73 

> 
O 

tH 

. 

'3 S'd 

^ OB 9 
be o) _» 
C3 « w 

•c g*-* 

pd 


(r> 

z 

-< 

e 

i} 

P 

P 


® **3 

pd^i u 

o o 


r 


be 

d 


ie'i 

t2®tedoce*2fet> be*^ o3 ©"rtp^ ^ opP ^ dp2 ^73 

g I I 1.1 § fcS gi:S;2S_g.2|gs g §5 

® ® 9 

Iz; 


a la 

^ te I o 

d g 2*^ Js 

is d ® ® 
d 
® 


® 

t-i 

»-■ 

as 


® 

% 


05 

G'Gx: 

^ ag) 

||.g.S^S 
ass's 

•SpC ” *-■• 


d« 
O ■ 


d 

H 

H 

O 

w 

e- 

d 

o 

Z 


d 

® 

PL4 


CO 

o 

d 


® 
O Cfi 

•I- 

■a o. 


r—4 

> 

CO 

d 

03 

> 


O co^ ® 
e 12 ” 

fl d 

c3pp W 


03 


OcQ.d WCh 
73 
d 




o 

d fa 

d o ® 
cqE-< 


CO 

® 

d 


CO 

® 

*o5Q: 

o 


102 





























































































































































































eo Cl 

c^i-HkO f-H^a>cst'»<D 

»0 <D i-» C^ <0 Oi <£ 0> ^ <0 t-CC 

c^" <c oc ^ oT c> cT w 

oococ^ eo c4C^co^ 

^ ec »-• c^ 


«0 <& fH 

c^ o <o 
OS « ^ oc 

<D t-K 


CO<D«irf< 

OCC^OiOi 

^OCOTt< 

oo^<S 

<0 CO 


Oit^Oi^ 
<C CO-^ 00 
Oi CO O 

«« o c4“ 
*0 o< 


wS s 

00 <0 o 

^ ^ 

eooco 

1-H 1-i 4C 


r>« o»-( 

CS O <D 
05 CO 1-4 

M'*‘cfod 
c^ c^ 

1-4 W 


eoi-4»o^ioo5»o<0’^ 

r-r^c^F-ioococ5’^co 

Tf05’^000t^0»-'00 

c^^'ocTt^t^t^^oci-r 
f* CO »o CO »o c< c5c^ 


hT CC FH © 

t 

1 

• 

1 

1 

© 

• 

I © 

1 *4. © 

« 

1 


» 

1 © 

*4- © FH © 

1 

1 


1 



• d 

*©1-H 

1 



< © 

*4. © © © 

1 

m 

1 

m 

« 

1 

d 

g 

*© 

• 

1 t4. fF 

« 

• 

1 

• 

• © 
A 

cd^^ood** 

9 

1 

9 

i 

1 

1 

1 


1 

1 ^ 

1 as 

1©-^ 

1 

1 


1 

1 

1 

fH fh Jh fH 

t 

■ 

1 

1 


1 

1 


. 

1 » 

■ 00 
■ 

1 

m 


1 

■ 

1 

■ 


^ r-4 00 
CO CD 40 

■^ooo 

CO 10 CO 
CO 


0©t4-©©0©CC© 

oo©d4rHrrrd© 

©FH©^4.^d©FH© 

*4-©©© 
d *4- © *4. 

0 FH IT © 

1 1 © © 

1 1 © © 

1 td© 

t 4 

© 0 

©*4- 
4** © 

1 © 

> *4. 

• d 

1 

I © © 

1 © 1-H 

1 © *4. 

1 

00 4^0©© 
© FH l4- ^ 05 
OfH ©0 © 

1 

1 

1 

1 

g 

© © 
CO 05 
CO ^ 

■ 

1 

1 

1 

0 

*4. 

1 

1 

1 © 

1 *4. 
lO 

1 

1 

1 

1 

©do 
*4- d 0 
© 00 Cl 

o©tCoot4rFtr»£5j>r 
©•^©0’4?*t'-FHFHHr 
d © fH fh 

rs #s a« as 

© ^ © d 

© *4- F-l © 

c- 

^ 1 #s as 

t 1 © 1-H 

1 I © © 

1 1 fH 

^© 
© 4r 

as 

• © 
*© 

1 

1 

Cl CC d*‘©'‘cD 

1 

1 

1 

1 

edd” 

© 

t 

1 

• 

1 

8 


1 as 

1 ^ 
Id 

t 

1 

1 

I 

1 

as 

0 


C0O©©©i-Hfh©O 

d©CO©l-HFHFH©FH 

OCOdt4.FH©©4^t4. 

fH © d 
© Cl © 

FH © © 

( 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 *4- 

14r 

1 d 

©»ci©©odcD*4rFH 

fH©fH©fH©©CO^ 

4i**©©d©’^FHCod 

CO Cl 0 

© *4. 

© 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 © 

1 


^ »H 05 
CO CO 1-4 
CO *-4 c^ 

S ‘"oo ^ 
05 *0 


8 


CO 05 1-4 CO C^ O »0 »0 05 WQCC50 

05 U5 CO C^ >0 05 »0 c5 »CC500»O 

^ CS U5 ^ Tt< CNi 05cct^0 

C^ 00 CO" t>r CO »0 O i-T c^,-r»o»c 

00 CO »0 1 -H 05 1-4 1 -H 1 -* o 05 CO o 

^ CO 05 o C< 00 CO i-« 1-1 1 -H 


Cl 00 

CO 

cc 00 

fcO cc 


»-i o 
»oc- 

CO 05 

•4^^o^ 
CO 4^ 


8 

o 


CO © 1-4 ^ '4i4 

Cl »-< O CC Cl 
d 10 1-4 ^ 

*> «« «h 

C» 1-4 Cl © 

CO !>. 


r- Cl ei 
CO 4C © 
©©rH 

lO CO CO 


© Cl OC CO 
CO Cl CO © © 

©■^oo^co 

i-h'CI CO 
^ ^ 1-t 


©©0000 

Cl CO Cl CO 
Cl © l-H © 

© ^ ^ 

^00 


©©©©©^©© 
©00^—»-hOO^^^ 
00©©«COCO©4*i 

t>rcp'^cd^i^^05© 

J^©(Nr-4^€0^© 


I 

• 00 
It^ 
I© 
i ^ 
I © 

I © 
I 
I 
I 


Cl ^ 
CO 1-H 
t- © 

Cl 


00 "^ © © "^ 
© 1-H I'* TJ4 © 
© 1-H © © 1-H 

cTeo cico 


© © 
CO © 
© ^ 

co'ci 

co-^ 


© 

r- 


© 


Cl 


© Cl 
C- Cl 
CO 00 

Cl © 


•^©^©dco 

© © Hj< Hr fH 

c-coc-o©i-4 

cCod^cTcoco 

COHT COCO©CO 
OC ^ 1-H 


s 


CO - 
1^0 

'^ei 

©d 


©d©©©©©© 

t-Hr^d©©i-H©eo 

d'^dd©00'^d 

^^•4 Me «C •> 

^idnTi-HdCO©© 
©©©00©©©'^ 
© CO 1-H ^ 1-H 


© © 
^ © 
CO © 

•c 

<z>^ 

d 4^ 


©^©©©d©d 

©©©©0«l-HtH. 

©©Hrf-HC-©Tj44^ 

c-t'-©r«-©©©© 
©'^©©’^’^HTCO 
»-4 © 1-Hd ©© CO 

Cl 


» 

hT CO 
©TJ4 

tCir 
© © 
d f 


g ©d©©-^©tH. ©© 

1 -H © © o r«-o 1 -H 1 —( 

iod rr ht d ©©c- ©© 

oTooc-To o r^-^co co 

©©©©©©©c- 

©^coHri-H©M4 ^ 

•4 *4 9^ », 

CO ^ ^ 1-H 


4*gJ 


©o© ©ooo©©ooo 
000 000000000 

©o© ©ooo©©ooo 

©^ei ©-^ i-T od" t-T © CO 00 00 
coo-^ ©©d©oodi-4© 
©©’4»4 d©©©d©©d© 

rk *4 *4 #. •k •«, 

—H ^ ^ r5 ^ ^ rH 


ooo© 
0000 
© © © o 


d 



8§SS 

©©©00 


o©o©o©©o 00 
oooooooo 00 
o©©oo©o© 00 


© 

© 


*4. HT © 

F-> d *4. d 

^ Vs as as 

© © © 0 

^ as^^ 

© © 

tsTcc 0 cd© t4r 

© © © 

cdoTt'Z'© Cl 

Cl oTr-Tcd 

©©©i-Hd©d(5Q 

HrFH©d©i4.©ci 

c 

© d *4. 

Cl © fH 

Cl 

© 1 -H © 0 

g ©© ^ 

© © * 4 . 

© © © * 4 * fH © 

CO © © 

4** CO © d © 

©©©gj 

C 

*4- © FH © 

as 

d 0 

.. *4. 

© 

1-1 © d 

^ f4 hT © fH 

©*4.d©CO©t4.^ 

as as 

© fH 



8 


©-^ hT-^ © CO t-© © 

©4^*0 1-HClt4-©©1—'©©© 

©©d © © CO o 1 -H © d d c- 

c*?©-^ oToocTcDcri^Tc^co 

S ©i-H 04rdt-^4^©©d 

■^ © ©•^c-©©©»-4©© 

e» » K. —— 


d © « -^ 

© » hT l-H 
Tt< © © © 
^ ^ 

© d '^ © 
Od©© 
CO ^ © © 

CO 


© © © -H 

© © CO t>» 
d d ©© 

•4 ^ «k 

r- r- 4^ © 
^ Q d © 

oo© © 


d 


© 


©©COfh 
CO © CO © 
1-H © © © 

©'cd“© cT 

© © d 1-H 

© d © © 


1-H CO © 

d©tH. 
©FH © 

*4 » av 

hT 1-4 1-H 
©©© 
© »—I 

CD 


© -^ © © -^ © 
d O © CO Cl © 
© © CO C4- HT © 

Vs *. •« ^ 

d t«- 1-4 HT © 

© © d © 1-4 © 
© © © © -^ ^ 


© © © 
©C-1-H 

© 1-4 © 
1-H OC- 

© 04r 

© 1-H © 


©o©©-^ 
© c- 1-H 0 © 
d HT 05 -^ © 

F-^© © ©-^ 
C- t4- © 4 ^ 1-H 
00 ©©©© 


©Hr©c- ©©i-Ht^©-^©i-H ©© 

4ri-4©^ t4-©©©©r4.©^ ^ci 

t4.c-©c- ©©^i-4©i-4©© © r- 

©CO©© cTc^© CO© c^t-T© o'© 

©©©CO r4-i-H©o^©©© 4^1-4 

r-.icco© ^d©©r4><P'^© ©d 

C^IOf-TcO ©I-^CI rH 


© d 
hT c- 
© © « 

Cl © HT 
© © © 
© © 4tf* 

Cl CO Cl 


4^ © t-© hT © © h-(4- ©©©© 

r- 1 -H © o d "It* © dd©d© 

© © r-© © r-1-H HT i-HOd'^ 

r>r© ©*■ ©*■ CO 4r ©T<Hr d*“ t^r-Td-F-T 
©©©©t-oci©© d©^© 

00 Cl ©^ ht o ©t4- ^©©© 


d FH © f-H © © 

d 


d fh ^ © fh 


t- © © c- 
1 — d d o 
©r-©-^ 

tCd"© ©* 

t4- © © r-4 
© © © © 

FH Cl 


© © © © 
© © d 

FH O © © 

cooTci ^ 

© FH © © 
©FH O © 

d"* 


©CO© 
Tf 00 -H 
HT © © 

CO CO 
© © © 
© © 


dHrd©©Hr 
d © ^ FH © 4 ^ 
© © ©t--1- © 

•s *4 ^ 

4*4 d fH d © FH 
d © © ©^4• © 

HT FH © 1-H 1-H 


© FH © 

FH HT © 

^ d © 

hiToO CO 
tT ©© 
© © © 


S © 1-H © 00 
4r © © ^ 
FH © © O © 

_ *4 *1 ^ *4 *4 

d FH i>- d © 
FH © © © FH 
© d © © fH 


eo© © ^ 

Cl FH ©05 
©©dt^ 

a^ *• *4 •> 

l4-©t-© 

fh©C1C0 
©© Ch 


©t'-©©©FHdb- r-co 

©©©FH©tH©t>, ©Cl 
©4r©©©t4»©^ HT © 


4rdd©©©©t^ 

©©©©t4-©t>i4r 

©©©tHHr>^Hr© 


r- © 


d 


© 


tH© 

CO 


d©©dFH ©FH 


© 

8 © 5 - 
© o 


d©FH©-^©©©© 

05’^4^©©©©©0 

d©4rf©©d’^cod 


© © © o 

t- t- I4- 
© © © © 


« © © © 
O d © © 

© 14- FH © 


r- © CO 
© rr 00 

*4- tH 


©©© r-© © d 
©r-o -^ © © © _. . 

©©491 ©c-d©©©©© 


t- © © © 
© d d og 


© o 
© © 
r4*4r 


© o 

S c- 

4*4 


d 4r d « 
c- d © r- 
*4. o © Cl 

HTOco© oc©eo't- O4trco 

dt-FHOo 45rFHO© ©i>© 

©©o© ©"^©o r-d-H 


© 00 d 1-4*4. o 

45r © o ©00 © 

fh t— © hT fh © 

* 4^0 od HT ©‘od 
d © d d 00 FH 
*- ©00 © © © 


© © CO 
*4. FH 00 
© 491 4r 

©‘odF-T 
d © © 
FHt4.4ir 


© nr 


© fH o ^ 41** CO 
fH d 


© © 


« 




© 


4r fh 


00 


«d^«d 

oci o © fh 

'a* 

CO d^HT d^o 
00 © FH d © 
©©*4-00 

aw «4 *4 

fH fH dd 


©©iTfH 00 *4. O *4-*4* © r-© CDCl 

©©©HT t4.FHdO©'^«FH ©© 

r-r-oo© ©©FH©4tfi©oo© ©© 

c^cico*^ t4r‘o5cdc^©cd‘©od 00*4^ 

d © fH O © *4. FH © FH ^ '^ © *4. 1-H 

©©"^CO 00*4-©©dO©t4. *4-0 

^ ^ «4«4«>a4a4*.aka» a.*4 

fh fh 4roOFH©d©'^d •'Td 

© FH 


© © © 

© © © 
d *4- d 

d't'T© 

© *4- O 
©•»**© 

CO 4 * 4 “ 


©©d©©©©©-^ *4.00©© 

© © *4-00 © ■^ I-* 1-H © d©©d 

*4. © © © 4«1 t>. -^ *-. ©©©^ 

oT *0“ CO ht' cT f-T 05 © cooTc^od 
;0 ^ CO © 4 ^ © ©Q©-^ 

© *4- © © *4. FH HT © C- ©©©*4- 


Cl HT hT © 

*4. d o © 

*'• FH FH 

•cTci odoT 
©©©© 
dd©c5 


© © ©FH 
©© 00 © 
© © FH « 


fH HT d FH 
fH © *4, HT 
^ ©© -^ 


r- ©4r 

© *4- © 
*4. 4*4 © 

©“coco 
© ^ © 
© © © 


© d d *4- fh © 

© 00 t4. © © © 

d OC *4. hT © © 

^ a. ^ ^ 

©©FH 

© © © 

*4- © 00 


^FH © 
FH FH © 
© © -^ 

d“© *4^ 

d FH © 
© FH *4. 


» d 4r ht d 

t4.d©©FH 

00 © © © -^ 


© 

© 


FH © d 
© © d 
fH © Cl 


HT © "^ FH 
HT © ©4** 
fH © © © 

t4rd‘‘'^© 
*4-0 fh 4r 
fH d © © 


© d © 


8 


©©FH*'«4e* dFH©FH 


© 




© FH 


^ FS FS F4 _ F- F« FS FH F- 

fH d FH d d d ^ FH ^ 


FH©dd©©©© ^d 
^©©*4-©FH©Cl *4-© 

d©©©©©*'-© ©© 

edco CD eo*4r©ci‘cd' fh^^T 

© ©d fH *>. fH TT © •^© 

*4-©-^©©©fH© ©© 

d^OCl -^©COCO ©Cl 
© fH fH 


*4. © © 

© © © 
*4- © HT 

©FH^©Hrood©Oi 

©i-Hl-HQO»«©t4.0 

©0©©CCfH©»-ifH 

HT 41** © © 

© *4- d © 

*4. FH © © 

© 0 0 0 

© ©0 CO 
do©© 

«©*4-d 
d © © *4. 
© FH © © 

*4. © 4ir 
© © *4. 

© 1 -H 0 

© 00 d 00 © 4** 

00 ©©©© 

d FH d ©00 © 

FH © © 

00 © 00 

d © © 

t4.©©d© 
fH HT © © Q 
© 4*100 FH © 

0 © d © 

*4- 00 © 0 

© © fH FH 

0’4rd0©©©FH 

©d©©*4-©©*4. 

©©FHt^O©t4-4*1 

©d 
©© 
© 0 

© fH d“ 
hT fH © 

© 00 0 

FHcd'ciciororF-Torcjo 

0l4-^0t4-©t4.©0 

4^*4-0^*4.F.lHr©t4- 

© d « CD 

© 1-H ^ © 

0 00 FH *H 

© 0 05 © 

© © d *4- 
ddHT rH 

odF-Td cd 

FH FH Cl © 
41** © ^ © 

as » as 

© *4- 

*4. © FH 

1-H © d 

CD *4^ ed’^■© 4r 

© © © 0 *4. © 
* 4 . ©00 © 05 © 

OOf-T Cl* 

d © FH 
© FH *4. 

as as as a. a. 

1-H © *4, Q © 

© 0 00 00 © 

© 00 fH © d 

t4Zcd'^d 

©00 FH4*1 

FH d © © 

asasasasasasasas 

^ d fH 0 © fH fH © 

®^©©fH4*i<oo5 

05*4.'V©©©fH© 

^HT 
fH © 
*4. © 

^ <0 

©Ci’^OCb©FH*4-'^ 
FH © 

d FH *4. fH 

a. as a. ^ ^ 
© FH FH *4, 

as as ^ 

FH © fH 

0 ^ 


FH d fH 

fH d“ClCl 

fH ^ fH 

d“ Od'jhT sr © ©“ cd 

© FH FH 

©d' 


C3 c 3 


2 

"3 


a 

o 

Vj 


<D 
. ^ 


I w C ^ I w • m LJ 

|. 2'3 2 og>i§ c.S 8 :Sfea 
OOOOP\&h>^ 




< 

a 

H 

z 

u 

O 

e 

H 

P 

O 

QQ 

A 

Z 

< 

H 

z 

< 

H 

w 

H 

P 

C 

CQ 


fl 

o 

u> 
a 

1 

O .• 

■t® 08 
taC*« 

0-9 


§ 

ifl 

bo 

.. 

2 B 2 2 

Q in O 03 

03 
10 
C3 


11 ^ 


*0 

O 


> 

fllF- 




iM ffi 

03 —« 


H p CD 


s 

o 

a 


0) 


iH w r* 

SSI 


- 

0.2.2 0 

tuo3 


tH 

o 


a 

CO 


o CD flj 

a>,P* u^'Z* o 22 

>V. >7! O 


a 

.22 

*3 


a 

o 

H-» 

CO 

O) 

F— 

l-l 

03 

-P 

o 


Sco 
o 


a eS 

fS ® 

1. o 

Ih 


O CO o 

5S3 

p*> 




»H 

o 


. 1/J 

»H ^‘IH 


O fl 

4. « 


^ 2 2o5 C3 g fl »0 W O P'S XP-tt, 

;zig pMS^ SfiWP^W 

a * — ^ - 


tH 

o fl 
o 

4.5 

to 
P 
o 


o 

a 

S 

a 


u 


O 

S 

bc 

.2 

•4^ 

a 

p 

a 


Q 

Z 

< 


'2 S C8 

' 2 

A) oj>i.a 
•< o S § £f 
"r iP 2 *5^ ' 
H— o> 


OMh:) 


u, 

si 


P 

/-V -2 

OcqEh 


-W o 


H 

O 

Eh 


M C> 




P 

U 

a 

13 

Q 


bo'O 
P P 
^ ca 

co3 

O o3 

h50 


* I 

n‘_lO 


CO 


X O ^ 

P p 

2 © 031 

a*;? *-• 

Sag 

ca 03 03 
OQCOGQ 


'S 

>5 

o 

a 

a 

05 

CO 

P 

o 

CO 

1- 

4> 

O. 


£ 

a 

£ 

05 

43 


^ X 
P © 
^ P 

«§ 

'^a 
o a 

2't3 
ce © 
(O 03 

©2 

0*0 
© p 

Ih g 

si 2 

- S ©2 

^ tH 43 0) 

03 * O >H 

05 ■*^ /.^ © 

PE? > 

1^-32 

© ca ' 


00 

b£ 

a 

Q 

t-> 

ea 

05 

tH 

2 

p 

4D 

03 

C9 

> 

as 

*» 

o 

a 

£ 

03 


CO 


■4^ 

O 


£ 

o 

a 

"3 

pq 

4F4 

o 

t>5 

• mm 

o 

05 

43 

HA 

CO 

03 

*© 

CO 

as 


P 

P 

o 

a 

£ 

o 



2 ©-H 
*5 O o S ” 

-<p2£2 



^ o Ph Oi - 
♦AHA'OUtl-l ©So 
.“ 2.2 c <0 2 S-o 

'gslsslai 

bflbc'p,. 2 P 5 


03 


O 

tH . . 

fe ^ 

DiP^ 
O O 


•*« P 

© g 

*243 


OJJ SMJ /*\ ' 

«SS«f^2 

o 01 

•4 «> • •• g 


o ^ .2 


o 

p 

o 


>»r^ 

U 05 

© -ti 

HA O 

*C P 

o 


03 

w 

05 

a 

o 

o 


05 


00 4.5 

^s§S 

o3 A bO u 
-pCOp 



eo 

HA 

o 

o^ 


p 

o 

'p 

05 

2. 

a 

© 

CO 

p 

e 

CO 

I- 

05 

Oi 


to 

bC 

a 

a 

Urn 

OO 

05 

HA 

P 

05 

CO 

05 

tH 

a 

05 
tm 
• •> 

CO 

C5 

HA 

CO 

•mm 

H-A 

08 

HA 

cc 


2 2 
P S CO o 

E?p 0.2 

HA 03 S^.S2 

*C © P 
H ^ <D.P 

S oa bo p 

HA 05 08 5 



103 




















































































































































































VC 


K 

c 

e 

Q 

-C 

k 

CO 


9 

k 

0 

k 

k 

0 

5 

9 

k 

“9 

•k* 

CJ 

6 

k 

^9 

9 

9 

CO 

9 

9 

k 

9 

"9 

9 

9 

9 

9 

<w 

•M 

CO 

QO 

9 

9 

•m 

k 

a, 

9 

9 


•C 

9 

a, 

4id 

9 

M 

0 

s 

I 

CN 


2 

9 

H 


a>«~ 

•c« 

0:2 


s 


r- © © ^ ^ 
© © o> 00 

t^04© ©© 

•^•^©^©©©'^04i-H©00© 

C^©04h-OO^kDrfi050©’rf 

004©Tt4©©©©004r'-©'4j< 

HJ4 

i-H 04 © 
© t- 04 

cSS 

© hH 

© © pH © © pH 

© © © kO © © 

© 04 pH 04 © !>• © 

04 © H}k pH p 
04 © *H © ^ 
© ©'t* © © 

t>- © 04 05 Q HT 
© Ht* 04 © © © 

04 © r-H 04 HJ* 04 

pH © 

© 04 © CD 

pH pH 

04 

G)'kO CD 04" CO CO CD'04©HHr^ 
©©•^ 1-H©© l-Hl-4'^©tH. 

04 

CO 0 04 

pH © pH 

So 

04 

pH Tfi 04 PH 04 © 

IQ iiS4 04 C4 

04 

04 " 

© i-< © 04 
»H pH i—H 

0 © 1 ^ © © © 

pH © CD © © 04 
© 04 

04 04 

0 04 

pH 

«» 


CD CO 
fcO 
CO 00 

mk * 

'°s 


<0 

0 

CS 

•w 

CO 

*w 

CO 

cS 


3 

a 


CO 

a* 

a 

>. 


<a 

O 

a 

cn 


D 

A 

•^'3 
o □ 

•cS 

<1 


c^ 

o 

00 

s 

o 

•>. 

*c 


CO »D O O? 

00 CO CD to 
CO 00 •-C CO 


CO 


COO 


0»0»-<QO»-<CDCO 
i-HCO*-'00’^‘O’^00 
Ot^CO^»DCO»-tCS 

oT-^o oT cf 00 ci »o 

lO ^ 


00 ^ 00 


_ - t'i 04 c^ 
0 CD O f 


o 

r^ 

co 


•D 

Oi 


0> CO »o 
m CD 

00 cocoes 


00 CD CD 


CD 

CO 


CD 

a> 


CDOt^f^ t-. CD CO CO O 04 CO O t>» »D 

00 o O O o CO CD ’-H •-* cO CD «-H t>- 

aSr^oo »o o wo o o^ o oCO CO 0 


00 CD CO CO 


r* O CD CO CO 

■"T CO CD CD 


t-« o CD »0 CO 
0 > 04 I'' *-• 

W3 CO I-H 


1 -( 

00 00 

CD CO 

04 ^ 
CO 


CO 
kO 00 
00 

CD wj 


p a 
o o S 

■‘^'O fc- 

02 
•i- 03 : 
-< Q.J3 
© o 
73 


CO 

CO 

00 

o 

CD 

*» 

Oi 

04 

«9- 


4C 0 > kO 

00 h* »o 
04 CD 04 CO 04 


00C0Oc0»0»--i04000iO»D0>k0 

000>»Dw04»OOi-^*^COOOOcD 

0>0>0400t^t^OOCfc04t^cDcDi-t 


04 00O h-CD CO »0 04 O »0 0> 

04 ^ CO —H O' 05 04 GO 

O4CO00 C0 04 CO kO O 00 O 00 00 


«-HkDC004»004^»OCOkO'«S* 

00404i^COCD04kOt--*4#«oO 

rHC004C0T-<»-HC0'^04cDt^ 


O Tf* 04 
04 CO O 04 


oocoeo*^oooh»t-kDcoo4r^04 

00’^O4CD^«-^t^C^CDrr'it<kO'^ 

^ tM t-H 


^ 40 ^ 
CO 00 o 
04 CD i-« 


kO >- C^ CO CO O CO kO o 


CO kO 


40 kO 04 CD 
CD 04 

cT 


04 04r^04'^040040»-ico 

40Tf«40 00 00 04CDC004COC^ 

^ ^ 04 


b- 


© 

0 

04 

© 

s 

© 

© 

04 

© 

of 



© 


04 

© 

04 





<d 8 

OOfl 

CQ cO 

• 

*3 M 

*S5 
W m 
0 ) 


h« 

o 

CO 


& 


03 

4^ 

o 

E- 


CO Q 04 OQ 
*0 00 CD 04 
04 04 04 1 ^ 


O 04 40 CO 
^ 40 O 1-H 
^04 04 




40 ^ 00 

CO CD kO 40 04 

l>. 04 ^ 04 ^ 04 CO 




0 ? 

IH 

© 

04 

0 


Q 

© 

04 

0 

© 

© 

05 

© 

04 




0 

© 

© 

r>- 

© 

TP 

04 

Pp 

Tp 

© 

0 

© 

(N 

Hfl 

© 



© 

© 



04 



© 

0 

© 

0 

© 

tP 

© 

P 

TP 


© 

© 

0 

© 

04 

© 

04 

© 


© 

04 

04 

0 

© 



© 

05 

CD 

0 

t'p 

0 

04 

04 

© 

Tjk 

© 

© 

© 

© 

0 

0 


04 

0 

04 




© 

©’ 

04 

0 

© 

04* 


©“ 

l>p 

04 " 


■( 

©■ 

•» 

TP 

©‘ 

"© 

CO 

■© 



Tp 

00 

■© 

«> 


04 “ 

•» 

0 

04 

04 

© 



© 

04 

0 

© 

04 

© 

h- 

© 

04 

© 

© 

© 

0 

© 

© 

0 

TP 

© 

© 

© 

© 

TP 

© 

© 

tH 

© 


04 

© 



© 



© 


© 


© 

04 



04 

pH 


© 

04 

04 

© 

© 

04 

© 

Hp 




t>* 00 
CD 04 
04 04 00 

^ 

494 pH Q 

t^OOO 

1 -H pH 


04 


00 04 

00 ^ 04 O CO 
40 40 00 CD t^ 


04’^o4i-Hi-H4}40oooo4co4rQ 
t^CD^^^b-y^C0»-44O»OCD^ 


4J4 CO 


1-4 04 tH CD rH 


04 04 04 CO 00 

p o 00 1-1 ■'»< 

^ CO CO 


k0O00CDC0050000040500i-<C0 
OOCDCD04P40t^C^CDC0040004 
O04 04 C0«C0^i-H'^i-HC0Tt*C0 

CO 


CO 00 CO 
kO 04 04 
04 kO CO 

^ •> 

® 

04 —H 
^ O 04 


CDCOiOOO'^’^t^OO 
00 04 04.-H40i-H04 04r>4 
C0C^C0t>.»Dt^04 04t>. 

f-(’i^»-<|><DO4O4C0O> 
COi-H04C^OOCOCOt^CO 
1-H O 00 CO04 04 

•k #4 


kO 00 04 

^ 1-4 CO iO OO »H 
00 CO 04 00 05 CD 


I ’4J4 0 i-< CO 
I o 04 
1CD CO O 


_•. . ^ ^ ^ 

CS|4t'l>.,-H04©Ot^i-'00O4 

i-HCDh-CD©00©©©'^04 

COO4044j4c0CO00©’4f4kO00 

CO 04 " 


D4qo 

CO o 

oco 

00 ^ 
04 1-H 
kO 1-H 

04 


© 1-I o 
©00 
© o ^ 

C4 oTo 

pco 

C4i-ikD 


tn 

'O 

c 

3 

«PM 

O 

Xi 

3 


03 

u 

o 

03 
O hi) 

ns o 

3 Ih 

§a 

co»^ 

eg 

•S^ 

w 

03 


CO 

o ® 


__ CO 

:3^ 

.£S 


S 

03 

u 

OA 

O 

U 

Ph 


ooppo 
o p o o o 
00000 


'OOOOOp 

■000000 
000000 


oooooooooop 

ooooooppopo 

00000000000 



© 

© 

0 

© 

05 

© 

© 

© 


© 

04 

04 

© 

© 

© 

© 



0 

© 

« 

04 


TP 

© 

Hp 

04 

04 


© 

04 

04 

© 

0 

r>- 

04 

© 

tP 


04 

© 

TP 


© 

04 


© 

04 

04 

04 

0 

of) 

© 


© 




© 

0 

04 

© 

04 

© 

55 

© 


TP 




TP 

© 


04 

© 

C^4 

TP 

© 


© 

© 

Hp 

04 

© 

© 

© 

© 


04 

© 

03 

© 


© 

© 

04 

© 

0 


0 

0 

© 

HP 


© 

© 


HP 

tP 

Hp 

06 

© 

P- 



© 

© 

© 

04 

© 

HP 

!>■ 

Hp 

© 

P- 


04 


0 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

04 

TP 

© 

04 

© 

CD 




TP 


rH 



04 


04 



pH 


04 

04 

© 

TP 

04 

© 

04 

© 





© 


04 

04 

04 

© 

tP 

Hp 

Hp 

© 


© 

t>- 


kQ 

•k 

04*^ 

04 

© 


«0 



QD 

00 

04 












Op 

pH 


ee 

00 



0 

CD 

OP 

op 

00 








04 

© 




© 






% 


03 

Wi 

fl 

o 




00 

S8 

c^ 

00 

© 

Dl*’ 


o'- 

p 


© 


03 

w 

o 

Eh 


00 

© 

of 

CO 


8 


03 

o 


C4 

04 

oT 

00 

00 

«■ 




^ o 

-t“ll 


cs 

CO 

o 

o 

s 


C4 




a 

cs 

«« 

4> 

4-> 

08 

-4^ 

CQ« 

O ® 
o u 

•3 C3 
CO ^ 

> 9 

•—• 03 
'OXi 

P. 

08 

ho 

§ 

o 



04 © 

•© 

rH 

Hp 

04 


04 0 

© 

04 

© 

© pH 

1 

© 

© 

04 

0 

© pH 

0 

© 

© 


1 ^ 

© 

© 

Hp 


tH. 

TP 

tH 

»H 

Hp 

t ^ 
1 


04 “ 



of 

CO 

hf 

© 

© 

1 

1 







tH. 

s 


g kOOQOOO'Tj4t'-.©'Tf4 
OC^i“<*-*t'-C400C4 
OC>0©©00'^©'^04 

cT CO o C4 kO C4 CO cs* 


t>. C4 


©©eo© 


C4 

O 

© 


t>. Tf t-os ^ 
C4 © D4 CO « 
00 © O O© 

kO 

© © CO CO 
^ tH CO 


S 4 


D4«—iC400t^©©O4'^O'^i—'© 
©i5t4»-«©OI^CO©t-t'-COC400 
^000'»tf400©04«C4©i-4^00 

ecTo CO 00 CO 00oT oT »D cT^ 

t>-i—iC0©©t^t^O4©C4t>^© 
i-t'«t4t'*©C^©©CO©eOC4cD© 


00 © O © CO © 1^ 04 04 

r^. 1-H © CO 001-4 © © © ot>- 
Ot^© © © rf4 © CO CO © 04 © 

kOCOkrT oTcOkOO—Tc^’oTi-rGr 
04 © C4 04 O © kO © 04 o © "^ 

’«J4 05t^ D4 W CO O © © 04 

«> « 

1-4 © t>. 


C4©05©©©04’^©p© 
t>-05i-Ht'-’^©©CO©©0 
1-1©^©0©1—‘04 i-hi-«© 

00 0CrcDOr'^C4'C4‘kOO4^CD 
©'^05 04©©i-tD4r'-.t^© 
i-H©04©»-*0©©04t^^ 


04 !>. 
t'* © 

D4 '4J4 

evT©" 

© O 


C4 © CO 
© 1-4 CD 

Tf © © 

•» p ^ 
^ ^ 

O © © 

© rH © 


O 

04 


© 


1-4 ^ © 

0*4 1-* 


D4 '«t4 


S 


•^ -^ © 04 ’4C< 
h- i-H © © © 

^ O C4 O © 

Di*CO oTt-T 
O t-- i-« © © 
TJ4 C4 © 


•^04C4©«01^©©004©-H 

CP©«-4©©'i!j4C004©©©©t>- 

04©004-^©Tt4050©©i-HO 

^ocokD’^—I’odoTDfkoood't^ 

'^©t>»k004t>-0J©<N©i-4© 
•^t>-©D4©©©©©D4l'-i-H 




© C4 © © 
© © © -^ ^ 
© O CD 

•k ^ ^ 

P-1 CD © © 04 
© t'- D4 © © 
C4 © D4 © ^ 

40*0^ p-TirTr-T 


©©■^r>»0i'^t^'^©04D4t^i—I 
©04t''»0©i—•©©©©04i—(04 
''14D405D4©r-©i—(■^©1—«©i-< 

e^l>r'«J4‘cOCOOr©'-4"o‘oOkDO^ 

©i«H©t>»t'-t^C4©©<NO©C4 

^t^o©©i-^r^©r^04»-4©© 

I -4 1-t © 1-4 © 1-H ■>^'19400 

© * 


© t>- © C^l 
I—I 04 »0 © 04 
© t>. O h- 


Ob-t>.i-t©©Cg©Wpt>©p 


©©©©b-^©© 

^-^C0©O5©©© 


© 05 P CO 
04 © CD 


© ©© D4 © 
© 04 © © 
^4 « ^ 


0404i—»©P©04i-'©t^©C^^ 
04©©t^^i-H©©CD’^©00 

©t>.1-H©©04t^©t^(55l-Hf^’itf4 


© 01 


© l-H 


04 1 —< 04 © 1 —t © 04 1-1 04 ^^© 

© 


€8 

-4H 

o 



0 0 © 

pH © 
0 tH- © 

04©©i-h©i-h©©© 

©©TPt>.©©©©04 

CD04 04 04pH©pHHptN« 

04©04©©©04hP»qO© 

t^04pHt»--^00©©©©0 

ph©tP©0©ph04pHph© 

© pp 

0 © 

© HP 

04 © CO 
© pH CD 
•V © © 

kC CO kQ 

04 © 04 
TP 04 

06 04 kO © Tp' 04* ©■ CO 

p-PphppH©^t^0CO4 

©©t>-©©p4©©0 

OOodcD'orHp’c^cfkrforcTcD 

©Tp04 04©©pHC4r>.rN,»Q 
pH©04©pHO©©04tH.H^ 

04 00 
PH 0 
04 

pH’-^Pf 

0 © © 

© pH © 

pH © 

0 CO'pH pH 

04 

PH pH phtp'cO 04 Hji 

04 PH 

04 

04 


©©« 
04 0 HP 
© © C4 

©©©phcD©004© 

©©©©i-Ht-©©-^ 

Otp©04l'p©©TPkQ 

t>-PH©tN.C4©C4©pHpHpH 

©-H©C4©Qt^©©©© 

04 04©HpO©0©b*©00 

0 © 

Hp Hp 

kO tH. 

© © © 
04 04 Q 
04 © © 

© Q © 
© 04 00 
HP tN. CD 

O406ph©tpO4CO©O4 

040hP000040tPph 

pHO©tH.HPC4ior-.t>, 

C^HpPHPHTpD404tCt>ro’pH 

Hpt'-C4’ipO©04©t'-.t'-pH 

©©■^•^1>.^0©04pH© 

TP^ 
04 TP 
tH- 04 

00 04 © 
© -^ © 
© »o © 

0 ^ 

CD 

«D CP 

COtfpH06O4'pHtCO4‘c0 

e*> ^ 2 flo ^ 

© « 

HP©TP©l 6 lOkQt^TPpHCO 

© HP pH pH 

00 

o» 

«k ». 

© 04 0 

pp 04 04 

©00 

04 PH D4 

04©pHCDt^04©OTP 

©©04hPtP©040pH 

©CClHp04©©©C4i-» 

04 04P>-©C40000ph© 

OHp©r^»QTPC4©rs.pH© 

©tH.O04©TPPp00OOO 

Hp © 
CD 

© HP 

HP C4 © 
b- © ^ 

© b- pH 

Ob 'pH CO 

TP t>. 0 
Hp 

©" O) co'o'CO o'l^crT 00 

040^hPphtP^I>.'»P 

04 04©l>»HpfQiOtN.ts, 

pH'cDkOOTjTcOkOGO'cO^kO 

©©©©004©TppHC4© 

©©HPTPt^TP©1-H00406 

co*^ 
© © 
© 04 

Pk 

© HP ^ 
© © 
© © Hp 

© H^ 

CD A 

CQt>J.-ir-lCV)pHt^C4'CO 
«> ^ • 

^ 00 

HP©'^©©©©©kQpHCD 

10 PH 1-H 

00 pH 
© 

P> Pk Pk 

CO 040 


PH 

H 

z 

< 

•-) 

H 

•-) 

a 

a 

PH 

s 


S >>c3 

u « ^ 




CO 


Ph iJ W 

*e ^ 

o 


fl o 


r.'t /i-» Q 




c3 

u 

0) 
03 

S| 

^■s 


o 


03 
w *2 
U4 3 
« C8 
054^ > 


3 

O 


3 

*^ 3 


3 


a 

ID 

2J3 
3 D 

8-^ 


u 

D 


CO 


D 

Ih 

>_ 

cs 


q-g^a 

2>§SnSa 

-^ 809:3 


pj 

•< 

3 

H 

JZ 

u 

O 

w 

H 

3 

O 

Iz; 


2.2 


pep 

^ hfl 



D 

:z; 


o 

a; 


3 

O 4 


S.9 *• 

• • ‘3 Ld 3 
.SS;f3 ft3_'^ O 2 
OQoS 3MP^94 

.a •B 

5 5 


104 


t 


53,264 I 36,052 1 112.640 











































































































































































00 

o> 


t-H 

CO 

1-1 


uo o ^ 

CO ^ 

»0 I-H o 


wco 00*00 
O O? 00 Q 0> 
OT 

^ •» Pk 

^ *o ^ ^ 

00 1-H 


o> ^ 

00 00 C4 

o » 

'^00*0 
*0 00 h- 
C^ 


^0«0 ^ <0 <D 00 <0 <0 CO 1-1 

r^ Oi o^ t^ CO 

CO CO^ QO C^ »0 05 TJ« TJ* CO 

*Oi-ri>r oT 05 oT 00 CO 00 CO 

<0 w CO ^ ^ 

*-tC0 


C^ M CO 
CO *C CO 00 
CO *o h- ^ 

«> Wh «k 

»C CO o 
CO 


C0«t>.0 
05 ^ CO 1—• 
1-^ t«-CO CO 

o^t^ro" 

00 CO 


OOOCO 
CO 1^ CO 
•-• ''C T»« 

of »o i-T o 

11^ *0 05 


^ O 

oTio o 

O 05 


1-H QCO i-» 
b- 1-H ^ O C^ 
05CO O ^ 

1^ 1-H O 05 t- 

N *0*0 


sss 

CO ■*»* t^ 

•^’‘oo’‘oo 


C^QOQ^CO 
1-H<0 ® »0 CO 
^ CD ^ 

1-H CO *0 C^ Q 

*0 »-H^ 


2 g 


^ » 
^ t-- 


cs 

s 

eS 


CO »o 
05 t-- 
*0 05 

CO CO 


00 lO 

t- 

CO CO 

** 

CO c^ 
CO f-i 


S5 


CO 

05 


I O t- CO 
• CO *o 
I 05 -H 


I 


»0 CO »-H 
0500 
CO o 

•« Ak 

OCOCO 

»"H CJ ^ 


CO O <N 

S *0 CO 
05 00 
^ 

00 00 I-H 

cog^ 

1-H 


cooDcoo^coao-^i-H 

C<j^C0C:5g^*O*OHj< 


1-H 00 


05 CO h9« 


^ CO »c »o 
00 ^ TT o5 
CO *0 CO *o 


coco cf00*O OCOCO O CDt'f'^i-H 

f-H OI tf5 *0 CO cow •Ht-HOO'-H 


00 

05 


*o 


C5 X 

X X 

X X >o 

<35 *0 

C5 X 

X fH O 

o 

HJH X 

C5 05 b- 

X fH 

05 Htl 

1-H lO 

X fH 

H9> X 



CO b- 05 1-H I-H 
CO 05 b* o 
CO '<9* b- 05 CO 


O 00 CO 

b- rH 

CO CO 1-H 


*005b-b-»0*0*0WO 

•^QWO-hW0005 

Woo*owHj<-u<b-co*o 


05 ^ 05 CO 
b- 05 05 05 
CO 00 CO *o 


1-H CO »0 b- 
00 *0 W CO b- 
O ^ 

w 


^ b- 05 
Hb 00 *o 
C5 CO rH 


lO CO CO 
CO b- W 


C0Wb-05b- 
CO CO 05 05 CO 
05 CO f-H 


O CO 1-H 

05 05 *0 


CO »0 CO *0 
00 00 CO 05 
00 


05 ^ O 1 -H 
»-• 05 -o 
o I-H CO »o 

00 ^ 05 ^ 
1 -H *0 b- CO 
05 CO 


05 *0 

1 w 

05 05 O 

CO 05 *Q fH 
C5 *0 o6 F-i 

» 

1 

1-H O • 

w 



9 

1 

O CO < 

X *o 

‘ X 

>o X *o 

1 

*0 Hfl 1 

s 

1 

1 

O b- C 

FH *0 

• CO 

1 

b-O >0 

fH I-H 05 CO X 

t 

§ 

rt* *0 I 

• 

1 ^ 

1 

Oc 

X w 

«» 

• b- 

cfbToT 

cf xedofF-f 

1 

1 

edcT 1 

§ 

• 

1 

1 •» 

IS 

1 

1 

•> flk 

f-H 

*0 CD 

• o 

1 fH 


CO 

1 

1 

XX, « 

% 1 

1 

1 

• 

1 



CO 


I 

• CO 
I *o 

• o 

I « 

• 05 
ICC 
I 

» 

I 

I 


00 1 -H 00 05 0 
05 1^05 b- b- 
b-050 05 


05X 
X 05 
t^b- 

O 

X o 
o 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

t 

1 

1 

t 

05 'Tb C5 W f-h 
fH 05 05 HiJ> X 
X X *0 b- 05 

CO fH X 

00 o 

CO FH X 

»0 X 05 
b. FH 05 
005 F-H 

FH05b.005COXHj<05 

X0*0*0>0*005t--C0 

•VXXWOSOIOsOSf^ 

b-X CO X 

05 O C5 05 

*o *5 b- *o 

05 05 O X 

F-H 05 b • F-H 

X ^ X X 

fH fH 

X X 
*OcO 

1 

ICO 

1 CO 
' b- 

b- O FH 

05 *0 *0 
X05 05 

1 

1 

1 

1 



1 

■ X 

1 *o 

I X 

1 

1 

t 

1 

t 

1 

1 

1 

• 

1 

1 

1 


X *0 *C 05 X 
XXFH»Ob- 
fH -H CD CD O 

1 1 

1 1 
t 1 

1 4 

is 
1 1 

•» 

CO HJ* 
05 CO 
fH ^ 

bTlc 

b- fh 
XfH 

1 

( 

1 

1 

1 


1 

1 

1 

1 

fH CD CO X O 
CO O X fh 
fH 05 X 05 fh 

«*•*#> 
b- X X 
*o X *o 

H9i I-H H«* 

^ 

CO FH 1-H 
05 X 

»o 

Hji »0 ui CD X *d 05 o 
05rf<*OF-iroeocowo 
*OCOC0b.05C0XO5H9i 

Xi0 0l*0 

FH X X 05 
fh X 05 fH 

CD 05 ^ *0 
CO X CO Hj* 
^H ^H ^H 

05 FH 

' .h 

1 b* 

1 fH 

1 

i 

^ a^ •• 

Xb-FH 

b- 05 X 
fh 00 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 


1 b- 
i fH 
l fH 

1 

1 

I 

1 

1 

t 

1 

1 

1 

t 

1 

1 


CD X O FH ^ 

5:“"?2SS5 

1 1 
• ( 

1 1 
( 1 

1 

t 



1 

1 

• 

• 

1 

1 

1 

t 

I 

1 

1 




^ ^ 

fH fH fM 




t 

1 

1 

1 


1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

» 

1 

1 

t 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

• 

1 

1 

t 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 


1 1 

1 1 

1 t 

1 1 

1 < 

9 

1 

1 

1 

t 


^ CO CO b- 

05 05 *0 CO 

05 00 O 

Co" Q O 05*“ 

CO 00 CO CO 

05 ^ ^ 


CO 00 *o 

00 i-< o 

05 05t^ 

^*o 


1-H *-H b» O *0 

00 CO »o o CO 
b- CO b- CO ^ 

ofoCOCO^OQ 
^ W CO CD 00 

W CO CO 1-H 
CO 


1-H 05 05 
05 05 o 
CO 00 

oTco"^ 

005 05 
b- *C CO 



05 05b-b*.C0Ht«C0Oe0 
05^^b-b-*C*0C0O3 
b-O^Hji-^OCOOSi—t 

0'^<0bfc0*0050r05 

b-COQ05'^»OCOHjit^ 

C0b-OC0Hfi05C0Oi^ 

av «* 

05 05 1-H 1-H 


b- »0 X 05 

X HJ1 X FH 
*0 05 FH b- 

XC0 05X 
X X xb- 

XCO »0 FH 

*OCD 

•X 

' fH 

1 

1 

CO 05 HJ* 
lO X »o 
CO 05 X 

05b.b.b.05 1 

05 X *0 X • 
05 O 05 b- CO ' 

fHO 
*o *>qi 
>0 

*o *o »o b- X 
05 Xf-h b- tH. 
05 FH CD b* O 

O CO 
O b- 
Hj’ O 

cdx FHof 
r* CO 55 o 

05 HJI X X 

«* a^ ^ 

S’ Xb-O 
<30 05X05 
X W X 

>o o 

b- X 

‘05 
• 05 

1 FH 

P» Pk A 

fH 05 

05 *0 X 
Ht< O 

of'^cdofoT ' 

b- 1 
fH t 

a^ p* 

X05 

X X 

CO COO -aJ" 

OfFH 

fH 


05 


^ rs 

1-H CO 
Ob* 

•* 

CO 05 


^05 
fH ^ 

CO I-H 


*0 b- 05 

S 05 b- 
-H b- 


CO b- 1-H b. CO 
b- O <0 05 
b- O *0 HJ1 CO 


CO 1-H *-H CO -H Hpl ^ 


CO 05 1—1*0 05 b* 05 CO b-05 HJ< CO 1-H 1-H 05*0 05 05 

05*OHfi 05C0 h}i05^05C0’^05 0500005 

»O^CO OHj«0 00 CO CO 05 b-05 CO ^ CO X »0 *0 »-* 

*OOb- COCDfcO CO 05 05 ^ CO1-H 05 i-H’i-H'bT^ 


^ rji O CO 
b-X005 
05 CO CO CO 


oooo 
O Q O o 
oooo 

05 CO *o o 

1-H 

X X Ht* CO 


*0 ^ tH hH 


»o 


ooo 

ooo 

ooo 

b^CO »0 
*0 X 05 
O ^ 1-H 


o o o o o o 

S o o o o o 
o o o o o 

oTHtToT *o CO CO 
CO b- 05 i-< 05 CO 
CO CO *0 b^'^X 


ooo 

ooo 

ooo 

OObTbf 

o X 05 

*0 CO 1 -H 


X^^b-b» 
f'- 05 05 05 X 
b. X rt’ 05 C5 


b* X 00 *0 
b> *0 1-H 05 
O CO *0 05 


1-H 1-HC505 I-H 05rH05 


CO 

®ss 


X CO X CO 
CO I-H X 
CO o o w 


05 ^ X 


O X b- X 
lO »0 b- 
X ^ »0 05 


b* b* 

<0 lO 

05 b- 


b- 05 


•• 


05 

05 

05 


*0 *0 CO 05 
O 1-H X 
05 HJH 




H9H 05 
O lO 
05 
^ «*• 
ox 


O 

F-H 

b- 

CO 


05 

X 

b. 

CD 

*o 


CO O 

So5 


^ O b- 1-H 

05 O 1^ O 

*o b- b- *o 


*o X 
X 

05 -H 


O X 

05 

X 'itfH 


X O I-H 
05 X 05 
^ X 
^ 

CO ^ CO 
1 -H o 
X 05 *0 


00 o 1 -H 

1-H X CO *o X 
o X 05 X »o 

ufbTF-^of-f" 

05 CO X 05 IJ* 
b- b- 05 CO X 

X 


^ X 
^ iO CO 
X 1-H CO 

b^Hb X*" 
^ 05 X 
O *0 CO 

fH ^ 05 


*0X0 

o 05 25 

X 05 

CO-HCD 
b- CO HJI 
X O CO 

X 


.. .^Xb-eob- X05*0*2 
o 05 F-H *0 cO 1 -H O b-X 05XXCO 
b- X CO *0 1-H C5 b. fh »0 OXXi-H 


CO g »0 05 


b- 

o 


CO 1-H rt< X 
CO 05 X 

X o 


CO lO Hf< CO 
O Xb. X 
'XX CO 05 


b- CD fH 

S 05 00 
b- *0 


1-H lO 05 lO fH O 
05 CO X 05 05 CO 
1-H X05 b-05 O 


b- »o 
05 05 CO 
05 ^ 1-H 


X COW CO cp 
HJ* o CO ^ 
X b- X X lO 


Pk P« P« 

O X F-l 

05 Q 05 b. 

05 O 05 X 

X X 05 X 

lO X CO 

p. Pk p p> p. p 

OCO ^ FH FH 

ofcobf" 

O CO HJIO 

*o 

05 W O 

*0 O »0 b- 

05 FH lO X 

5> »o X >o 

^ *0 05 

05 *0 05 CO O *0 

CO FH X 

b- »0 O 05 05 

X 

W X X 

HPI FH X 

X *o 

CO X 

CO X 

fH fh 

fH 

fH X 05 


p. 


Pk 

o 

Pk 






CD 005 05 
*C 05 b- CO 
■^b-b*X 


CO 



8 

X 

X 

X 

o 


CO 

X 

o 

X 

b- 

X 

05 

05 

*o 

X 

A 

CD 

CO 

05 

o 

CO 

X 


O 

Hb 


05 

*o 

“5 

CO 

fH 

Hb 

X 

o 

Hb 

Hb 

CO 

b- 

CO 

fH 

a—H 

»0 <35 

>o 


05 

S' b- 

*o 

CO 

X 

05 

CO 

CO 

05 

o 

05 

05 


*o 

X 

05 

X 

05 

X 


05 


Hb 

05 

X 


o 

05 

25 

o 

X 

b- 

X 

CO 

<35 

o 

Hb 

Hb 

o5 

X 

X 

CO 

Hb 

CO 

05 

CO 

fH 

05 

b- 

05 

3! 

05 

X 

05 

CO X 

05 


05 

^ <35 

X 

S! 

o 

CO 

Hb 

05 

Q) 

s 

b- 

CO 

% «r 

b- 

b- 

X 

rb 

HO 

X 

-Hb 


CO 

cS 

X 

f-H 

X 

05 

X 

05 

Hb 

fH 


fH 

X 

C30 

CO 

b- 

fH 

X 

o 

X 

X 

fH 


Hb 

X 

o 

b- 

05 

CD 

05 

05 

b- 

*o 


X 05 

b- 

05 

b- 

05 Hb 

fH 

00 

b- 

X 

X 

*<3 

O 

o 

b- 

X 

X 

X 

o 

« 

Hf 

CD 

a* 

o 

CO*" 

*o 

05 

p 

Hb 

b- 

P 

05 

«■ 

b- 

p 

*o 

Hb 

od 

Hb 

05 

of 

co" 

b- 

p 

CO 

cd 

S* 

p 

X 

o 

p 

CO 

X 

S 

p 

05 

*o' 

CO 

p 

Hb 

o 

S 

bf 

3! 

p 

05 

O 

p 

05 

>o 

g 

of 

*c 

p 

b- 

b- 

05* 

05 

o 

fh 

of 

*o 

p 

X 

X 

<» 

X 

p 

b- 

CO 

p 

05 

X 

P 

05 

*o 

*d 

Hb 

od 

*o 

s 


p 

Hb 

CO 

P 

CO 

P 

b- 

o 

oTcd 

CO FH 

P 

b- 

00 

p 

o 

b- 

p 

Hb 

U3 

'cO* 

o 


cd 

X 

s 

p 

b- 

X 

05 

P P 

05 


o 

H9’ 

X 

05 

*o 

b- 

b- 

05 

cO 

X 

o 

*o 

CO 

X 

o 

CO 

X 

CO 


X 

Hb 


05 

X 

X 

Hb 

Hb 

fH 

X 



X 

uO 



CO 

X 

CO 


X 




fh 

FH 





Hb 

X 

CS 


CO 


F-H 








od 





fH 

Hb 

of 

o 

cc 


fH 


x* 

05 

F-H 

p 


p 




p 

Hb 





p 




o 



p 


















05 

CO 

05 

o 


X 

CO 

b- 

05 

b- 

X 

05 

S’ 


Hb 


CO 

05 

05 

o 

>o 


Hb 

<N 

co 

b- 

b- 

CO 

X 


X 



*o 

o 


<35 

CO 

05 


X 

o 

05 

05 

X 

*o 

05 

*o 

05 

CO 

»o 

b- 

X 

bf 

p 

Hb 

p 

05 

bf 

p 

o 


p 

Hb 

of 

CO* 

1 —i 

p 

b- 

p 

P 

p 

bf 

X 

of 

X 

X 

b- 

fH 4 


Hb 

X 

fH 

o 

X 

^H 

o 

X 

X 

QQ 

CO 

>o 

b* 

Hb 

O 

b- 

O 

« 

X 

X 

X 

b- 

05 

*o 

w 

05 

05 

00 

o 

X 

05 

x" 

P 

X 

p 

S’ 

P 

05 

p 

X 

F^ 

of 

s 

05 

P 

*o 

of 

p 

bT 

cd 

FH 

p 

o 

p 

b- 

o 

05 

cd 


»0*005b-05 05XOb- 
OX*--00*OCOb-X 
05b.XXXC0XO*0 

u^'eoofo^Hji’co 


b- X X X w *o X 
X t'- 00 b- CO O 05 

oocobr^orbfF-H^ofco 


*0 Hb X Hb 

FH 00 CO x 
o W 05 X 

Hb b- X fH 
<30 Hb XCD 
b- fH Hb 05 

*0 o Hb Hb 
05 X b- FH 
Hb *C X b- 

X *o *o 
O X X 
CD O S’ 

XC5 CO 05005 
X CO 05 *0 X 05 
1-H 05 05 *0 05 b- 

»0 b- >0 
■S’ X X 

b- O FH 

xxb-XHb 
CO X b- 05 b- 
000 05 CO CO 

O CO 05 05 
05 b- b- 05 

^ox«o 

-H 05 »0 F-H 
b— X fH b- 
*0 X CO X 

Hb XOc6 
>0 X 05 •S’ 
Hb S’ X o 

X X S’ 05 
fh b- *0 05 
0 05 O b- 

Hb CD S? 
05 05 05 

f-H 05 fH 

cd 00 <35 05 CO O 
05 05 05 X XHb 
b- b- CO b- X 05 

OO Hb 

F-H Hb F-i 

CO *0 05 

OXb^XO 
fh O fh O O 
Hb O hh fH b- 

*d»o CO Hfi 
CO CO *0 05 
FH b* *0 FH 

05' 05 FH 

CO F-i F-i b- 

of COfh 

P P 

P 

rH 

F-fofof 

05 fH X X05 

FH FH 05 


ss 

CO fh 
H b 05 

X X 


*dcd 

FH O 

05 O 

s* o 

05 X 
tH. O 

p p 

XX 

sfof 


CD b- b^ 
b- 05 CO 
05 S’ O 

s 

S’ 

>o *o X X 
b- CO b- b- 
05 X X b- 

X 05 fH 
<5 CO S’ 
® b- 05 

of bfo" 

05 Hb S' 
XXX 

»0 X X X X 

O O O fH 1-H 
05 b- ^ *0 05 

*0 0^0 
X FH O 
X >0 05 

p p p 

X FH C5 


0f*d05 F-t 

bfcdo 


X »o X 
05 X 05 
X 1 -H b- 

co »o oT 
X CO X 
05 CO X 

tC o CO 
05 


CJi-HC0Xb-X05XX 

-HX0505005XXO 

X*0*OXXi-HXXb. 

*OH9^-H‘»OCOXH9i‘*0*0 

i-HXC0X'^C005’>tfib- 

05b-005C00050i-H 

00^ C'f OCT 1 -H 05 bf F-r05 CO 


05 CO o o 

*o X X b- 
05 X b- X 

CO of CO CO 
b- HJI Tb X 
*CXb-X 

ofofx"—r 

C5 


o xo FH 
X Hjl b- b- 
05 05 o *0 

^occ<S 
>0 05 b-o 
HJI 05 05 

ai> #. «« 

CO FH 1-H b- 


*0 O b* 
O 1 -H X hC* 
CO X O 1 -H 

»o ofc^cT 

05 1-H o 05 
OOfhX 

— — -K F. 

05 fh o 1-H 


05 X 05 
*o O X 
b- fh fH 

fh'io 

O FH 

X Htl 




X05 b- 05 CO X 
X X X b* X fH 

rH b» fH fH 0> 

CO CO” f-T X >o od 

05 *0 O X 05 tH 

b- b- b- X X 05 


FH CO O 
CD Hj* (N 
XHji 05 

*C xof 

fH X05 
CO 55 05 


fH 05 05 


OCDb-H5f>b- 
XO>Ob.O 
^ *0 b- XX 


fH 05X00 
CD fH 05 05 FH 
^ O fH f-H X 


05 FH X X 05 


05 b5 

fh b-o 
CO 05 X W 

co^w CO od 

b-H»< *0 05 
fhx >0 fh 

fh fH 05 


'oS 

a 3 

^ 03 

«W 

^ <o 

Ih 
3 IH 

^ 05 


60 
2 ?>* 


>* 


•■s o 


oo 
« ^ « 


CO 


2 m — 

C8 pi«^ -^H 




a 

CES 

^ o 
'P.S 


CO 


otE-i ijPM “ 

^ § 

.3 M 


_ _ 3 £ 3 

3p.otiw3cd3 

We^jsPP^OPH 

O 


' 3 

:(!.• 


3 

CO 

• a>4 





^,3 

Zo 


t£)S ^ r 1 

« a ^ 3.3 o «-• 
i« o3.= f: 5 o rt a o o 

CO 

•fh 


3 


GQ 


Hj 

3 
H 

» 

iJO 


iz; 


W 


GO 


i 

.3 

t£) 

PS 


3 

O 

HH 

3 

a 

S 03 

3^ 

P 3 

-H 73 




C5 


OS 


c3 


C5 

> 

CO 

3 

O 

iJ 


CO 

3 

03 

05 


£ 

I 


s § 

g g o 3 

C3 
X5 
03 


03 


CO 

J4 

O' 


:i; 05 
in 03 3 
OCQ'^ 

ce 
o 
u 


a 

o 
O ®3 
O®©*- 

-1F^ o 3 

-^otS 

Pm ® © 


3 

O 

CO 

o 

03 

,3 

• • 
03 
3 


gnS 

•3.2° 881 "o 

ppp^ OMP Sis 


e-9 ^-ES^S 


03 

1^ 


3 ® 

o3 o 


CO 

CO 


ill 


u, 

O 


3 

O 


as^ „ 

o3^ 


Ih 

©, 


'g^SwISiz: SQwphW< 
3 o ® ® 

Owen ^ 


105 


West Virginia: Huntington. 

See footnotes at end of table. 























































































































































































T^le C-9. Amount of public and private assistance and earnings under specified Federal work programs, by urban area, 1936 —Continued 


W 

T? 

fl 

a 

o 

•iM 

s 

3 

a, 


s- 

03^3 

•c« 


»-^i-tO»0»OX050 

Or-ToTcrTjrco'cocf 

(N 1-H 


00 


CO 

cs 


in' 

CC 


<D 

o 

a 

ca 

•4^ 

C/5 

♦*-< 

CO 

CO 

03 

V 

• rH 

X) 

3 

a 


CO 

© 

Q. 

>> 

© 

© 

a 

CO 


© 

x: 

'oS 


•-H lO 00 O »-* CO Oi CD Tti 

lO 05 ID CD CO 1-H CO •^Jh- 

00 00 CO 05 *D CD ■TJ< CD CD 

C9 IN 05 o 1 —» N CO r«» i-< CD 

O CD CO fH t^CO 

O *”♦ »H 




•4^ 

^ ^ a 
o © s 

U 

TD G'^ 

©33 

<1 

© o 
'3 


to CO 1-H 4© CDb- 

lO 05 05 lo i-H o IN 40 coco 
CO 00 O O 00 »0 05 CD 

cT 00 oTlo'cT n' njT ood 

1^ 1-H 00 1-H OO 1-H ic 

05C01-H 1-H C9 1-H 


© 

© © 
^ 3 
c? ce 

*3 CO 

O w 
CO 
C8 


40 00 CO CD CO CD N CD CD 
1-H HJI CO 40 <XI N HJ< CD 40 Hf 

05 1-H lO 05 N 05 CD 05 CD 40 

cdododtCcD t^^oTi-H* CDt>^ 
05 b-HJI Cs. 05 CD O CO OO 
CD 1-1 CO 00 CO »0 00 d 1-H 40 


U' 


S3 

•4.5 

o 


o b-CD o r>-CD N CD 40 

(N CO 00 t>-IN O 00 40 C04O 
05 HJ4 o N CO 05 05 C^OO 

cDori'rcdcd'^4o‘cd oTd 

O 1 -H o O CD N O 1 -H (50 0 

CD t'-»0 O 05 00 05cor- 

^ rH rH ^ 


2 

© 

T3 


CO 


(ga 

^3 O 

3 »H 

Sp. 

CO 

tuo w 
3 o 
fe 
3 ^ 

tH 

C3 


lO 


co'C 

w 


Gh 


OOOOOOOO OO 

S OQOOOOO OO 
OOOOOOO OO 

od'cdc'TcDHjrcrood HfTrC 

^OOOOrHi-Ht^OO 1 -HO 
HJ4 !>. 40 ■>5}< o CO CD N t>- 


Ht4 


00 


40 CO 40 N CO CO 


33^ 

•Sg 


a 

c3 

u 

to 

o 

u 


© 

•w«« 

'S 

Im 

2 

© 

3 

© 

o 


u © 
033 

^2 


40NC0t^t>- 
N o 05 00 
«1J4 CO 40 CO 

40 CD*" 


t5 *•— 

Is 

•-H m 

u 


C^40C005i-H05t-«05 
4O00CD00C0C0COCD 
C0 i-<00 00hJ1C0O05 

cD^i—I t>r i-T oTcd^ CO* 

l-Hl-HCDr«-CD40 40 0 
05 05COi-HrH00540 


1-H 

CO HH 
CD 40 
•< 
05 

CD 05 
CO 


eo' 


CO 


e3 

•4H 

o 

Eh 


t«-t'«-O5CD00O5^Hti 

t^4OCD00t-HC0OcD 

0‘D(N'^rHCOC005 

Nt^OOC^OOnfiCD 
4Oi-H<0t^t—4O4£0O 
05 05COrHi-H0054D 


I-H CD 
O 40 

00 CO 
05 
CO HJI 


CO 1 

1-H 


CO 


s 

o 

e 


^ <1^ 40 CO 40 »C CD 1-4 00 ti* 

« 05 40 40 rt^ Tt< (50 N Hf4 1-H 

1>- Tt4 40 CO CO d 05 N H»1 

«o cf i-T c-T o o 00 i-Tcd 
O N tN. 00 Hfi 05 CO O 00 O 

O CO 40 1-H 40 N 1«4 CO 

cddN t>^od't>^t>rcd' oT’itfT' 

CO rH 1 -H 


lpi| 


1-H ts. o N 1-H CO »D CO CO tH 
■Ht4 CO05 00 40 05 1-H 

05 CD ^ O 00 N 05 CD ^ 

^*-4^c^»-hc*-^o coco 
00 CD 05 05 00 1-H lO C9 
C^^C040C04040CO 40CD 

CO N N (50 bi-c-Tcd cT'^ 

CD t-4 W 


^3 

3 

C8 

© 

•4H 

c 8 

HH 


3 

o 


cC 

© 

63 


w 

> 5 

• 1-1 TO 

'3,3 

s. 

2 

tJO 

o 

o 

o 


© 

>H 

IH 

© 

◄ 

Gh 

3 

z 

< 

z 

H 

z 

3 

o 


to 

© 

® 


o 
© 
CO 

O O 
b£3 




G 


© orSQ a : cfl 

2 g-S ^ P P '2 P'S i 

.'3h50wcqco g S-q-gooEH 
*3 r 2 © o3 ca 

o 




© 

(-• 

03 

o 

n 

3 

c3 

'3 

(m 

c3 

o 

CQ 

>4 

-4-^ 

•f-1 

1-4 

3 

© 

© 

CQ 

^H 

63 

•OH 

© 

o 

CC 

© 

ja 

>4 

X5 

'3 . 

05 HH 

2 ^ 


4.9 

p+i 

^3 

® H 

© 


3 

o 

3 

M 


3 

o 

3 


G 3 
3 P 

« 3 
O c3 

c 

13+9 

^'3 

gs 
s 'i' 

P'3 
© 3 
o 


© 

Ih 

o 


- 2 © 
P^o3 ©v_ 

3i.-h Jh 05 
o3 ^ © . 4 ^ t.4 

9 © > feS 

o en © 

33.935 ^ 

4-9 ©*3 oiS 

*ter? 

TO 3 . -.-HS 

w © a >>5 
■25 "^-S- 
-t:.g 

“'§©©■© 
-9 a ^ 

W« is 03 CO 

00 o © © 

p ^ . 4-9 

•G 

t-t 633'©'© 
o a 3 ^ ^ 

pS-gOnPH 


CO 

63 

© 

1-1 

03' 


3 ^ 
o.t^ 


o o 


© 

2 

© 

,3 

4H 

© 

1 -. 

c3 

CO 

p*H 

c3 

49 

o 

4H 

© 

1 -t 

o 

a 

'c3 

w 


>4 

4-9 

© 

© 

-3 

49 

'© 

CO 

c3 

>4 

49 

3 

3 

o 

o 

© 

u 

o 

a 


C3 4 ^ 

«g 


CO 

© 

4-9 

c3 

© 

(-1 


p s 


P>>ClH 


C3 

CO 


4-9 

o 


CO 


l-< 

o 


t-l 

o 


o u 

4-9 O 


© 

3 

o 

3 

3 

3 

3 

C3 


b- *0 

1 3 

0 rH 1 ►-i 

iW 

CQ 

CC 05 

00 N 1 c» 

d 03 

CC 0 1 

3 

cs" 

OOrH 1 



63 3 ^ 
©.£? C3 

(-1 

o — © 
■ > 
o 


r-, 05 iH ^ ti 
5 ©,3 3 3. 

© t? © fci3 bfi 

(H •<-< •1.-I 

_ 

c— 40 a* M — 


*H *T3 

S p 

•3 H-9 

■5^ P 
P 3 

bp 

o,p 


^ 9 

© w 


CO 

© a 


3 

3 

49 

© 

Im 

© 

Oi 

o 


o 

4.9 

© 


CO 

© 

Ih 


63 

© 


o 

Ui ^ 44 

3 p.'p 


^ tl£ M © 

2 «fe-a 

2 -g^S 

.2 ” S 2 

fe P'p Jr! 
P 3 © © 

60 ^ ^ iG 

Si © 2 

S gS'G 

r " C! p 

ps^ 05 r^ 03 


3 

© 

© 

3 


03 

2 ^ 

C3 


p” c 


© 

9 p 

o © 

u 

© 


CO 


•'P.& 
93 a s 


a i 


63 S 

ja -S 

(H O 

3 3 

ja o 

© <© 

3 

.3 C« 


3 O’ 

CO © 


>4*_ 

^ (S C3 4H 

o © 

•a a 

as 
© 

J3 *H 
±3 .0 


3 
o 

3 

© 

1-1 

© 

4H 

CO 

3 

• pH 

a 

.3 
© c3 

0 ^ 2 

© 3 
4 ^ «3 
53.2 3 

4i © 4H 

S) 2 ’gg 

49 3 ^ 

OT 03 o 

©*3 iH ia 

3 4-9 

sao-l . 


bJD - 

Pi 2 

3 

ia *- 

c3 © 
© 49 

_ . 2 b 

3 ^.2 o 

.a So. c 

P Gig 


i23 

p g 

© p% 

at 

sa 

3 © 

P 05 
3 3 
© o 

>4 CO 

2 © 
c.a 

go 

gl 

2 e 

® 9 

Gig 

*•- t 

P o 

CO 

C.2 

■S.O 

e.=2 

C3‘3 

© a 

© 4-9 

05 O 

© p 
1-1 *H 

c. © 

© *3 • 

^ 03^ 

t5i> 

4.9 3^ 

to bjT) 

’■S«^ 

TO 05 >» 

2,3 
o b 

63 IQ 


3 

o 


© © 
CO 


2 

>5 p 


Q.9 


§ 


0 , 

o 


--P 2 
•<.t; o 
Ph ^'P 

3 

©Ph 5 


Ul 

0 


3 

Q,“3 P o 


Ih C5 
O 1 -H ^ . 
.^ 4.9 ,3 

05 P 3 4H K*" 


® *3 
© o 

g-s 

p 8 s^'S gja.:q 


a-b 


- 3 3 

a-s'i^ppp 

2 m P 

” 2 |l 

‘^la 

© U4 


«3 o 

S-GiS 

3^ © 


^3 

05 ^ 4-9 P 4:^ 

TO 3 gw g^^EnW 2 a 

Hi* l> o o o 




©•3. 

o 

1-1 


In. 

Os 


0 

0 

c: 

0 

nO 

u 

M 

r\ 

«5 

g 

0 

s.. 

a. 

k. 

0 

s 

0 

k. 

o 

S' 

k. 

s: 

s 

ffi 

t 

•M 

c; 

k. 

0 

ns 

£ 

e 

e 

CC 

•M 

CO 

CO 

0 

4.; 

e 

5^ 

•M 

K 

a, 

ns 

c 

0 

o 

•m 

•o 

s 

a, 

4.5 

t 

s 

0 

s 

i! 

I 


ci 

I 


CO 

3 

3 

s 

© 

• -H 

3 

3 

Ph 


©r- 

>3 

•c P 

Ah«2 


o 

Cl 

hjT 

IC 




N CC CD 10 
05 1 -- Hji N o 
00 f-H CC 05 1-H 

lOO^iO rdh-T 
CC 00 t>. f-H 


05 CC N 00 05 1-H Dl 
r- 05 CD N 05 o 
CD Tt* 4© o 05 00 

00 ^ 1 -H CD 1-4 o 
o cc*^ T-c eo ^ 


© 

© 

3 

49 

60 

•—I 

05 

© 

,3 

3 

a 


CO 

© 

ft 

>4 

49 

cs 

•0^ 

© 

© 

ft 

CQ 


© 

43 

■^3 

O 3 

4 - 9 .-H 
3-0 

<1 


40 

ID 

40 

00 

05 

CD 

0 

c 

40 


40 

40 

03 

CD 

CC 

0 

05 

b- 



CD 

CD 

05 

CD 

CD 

03 

00 

05 

40 

CC 

05 

hH 

00 

b- 

CC 


40 

CD 

hH 

03" 

t-H 


CC 


cs" 

«. 

40 

s 

hC 

o* 

rH 

od 

cs 

•k 

03 

ec 

d 













cd" 



























oSg 

4 J 3 c 

'p 92 

ft43 
© © 
3 


635 

CD 

00 

N 

60 

t>- 

cc 

49 


© 

© © 
bC3 
63 C3 
JL1 

3 05 

1-H *■—I 

O CO 
CO 

C3 


01 

10 

CD 

CD 


N 




63 

49 

o 


CD 

00 


r^- 

ud 

10 

4e^ 


o3 

1 -t 

© 

si 

© 

3 
3 
3 

CO M 
tC iH 
3 © 

•a^ 

Ih 

c3 

w 


S) 

o 

iH 

ft 


60 3 w» 
+* ^ © 

2 ® >•> 


10 

CD 

00 

t>- 

CD 

4^ 


4^ 

u © 

033 

p 


CD 

CD 

o' 

05 


44^ 


© 
• -H 
»-H 
© 
u 

HH 

C3 

Ih 

© 

3 

© 

o 



b- 


CC 


CC 

2 I 


• W ^ 

(N 

Q ^ 

cd 






oS 

4.9 

o 


CC 

05 

05 

00 *' 

CD 

00 

4^ 





00 




•k 

03 

00 

HH 

0 

0 



00 " 


00 


0 






CC 1-4 O CD 

Tt^ 00 05 M4 HTfi 

lO Cl !>- CD 00 


CD »0 40 
05 CC 


I CD 

> Cl 


CC Q 40 00 CD IN 1^ 

S o Cl CO CD 00 

CC O 1-H rJH CD 
05 N Cl 05 g Cl 


1-H CD 05 


Cl 00 


t- 40 00 CC CC 
CD CC 40 CC 
b- H!tl 4tl 05 

cT*^05 cd40* 
O CD 1-H f- c^ 
CC 1-H 4^4 


O 05 Tt* 1-H 40 CC 05 
05 40 40 ^ O 40 

Tti hH CD'OO ’4J1 CC 

oTcd cdod‘^To c3^ 
00 05 Cl CC Cl Cl 00 
CO -nji ec 40 CC 40 2> 

cc" 


40 ^ CD 00 CC 
4!5 d 4#1 05 cs 
cs d 05 O 05 

—Ti^ 40*' 40 t>r 
00 CO 40 CD 
CC 40 1-H 40 


CC 05 4!fi cC CD O cs 
CC 1-1 CD d 05 CO 
<30 40 40 CC 00 O 

*1- p. ^ ^ #1^ 

o *0 CD CD rn d 
CDCDt'-TP'00»Ot>- 
00 40 CO CO CD l>- 

•k 


0000 
0000 
0000 

'lo^d^i-Tcr 

d 1-H 05 4j< 

O CO CD 40 

H cd« 
ao 


00000 

QQOOO _ 

000000 
4<d cd'cT'^d 40 tC cd 

CC CD O 1-H CD CD 40 

40 o CC r- 00 CD Tt* 

^ -v . 

f.— rH rH T—< hH hH 



1 

t 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

» 

1 

1 

1 

1 

» 

1 

1 

• 

1 

1 

1 

cn 3 

1 

1 



1 

1 

9 

t 

f 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

as44 y 
•G P fc) 

1 

1 

1 

1 

t 

1 



I 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

i 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

t 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

^^2 

1 

1 

1 

1 

I 

1 

1 

1 

1 


1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

t 

1 

I 

1 

1 

1 

1 

t 

i 

1 

( 

1 

1 

1 

Ph 

1 

t 

t 

1 

1 

1 

t 

1 

1 

< 

1 

1 

< 

1 

1 

1 

I 

1 



1 


» 

1 


05 00 
CD 1-H 
40 05 


40 

rn 


cc 


40 

05 


di-Hd05t- 
d CD O 05 
CC 1-H 00 05 40 

od crTd’' CD oT 
O 05 HJ* d 05 
d 40 rH 40 d 


^ CC 05 40 40 o 

cs CC 40 d 05 05 CC 
1^ 1-H CC CD 

od i-T j-TtCH^TrCd' 

O d b- ,-H CC 00 
1-H ^ CD CD CC bi. 

CD 


05 


O 05 b- 

?5§S 


CC b- CD CD 
b- 05 40 d 

ec »o 1 -H 40 


05 CC 03 40 ^ 40 o 
1-H CC 40 d 05 05 CC 
05 b- H#i »-H ec CD 

of i-Ti^ bd^ tCcd 

CD d b- 1-H CC 00 1^ 
hh CD CD CC b-1^ 

cd' 


1 -H CD b- O 

ec -Hji d o d 

1-H CC Cl O 40 

CC" CD Hdfd bd 
00 CO cs 05 o 

05 CD t-H 

cc'd*' ^i-T 


cs d CC 00 O 40 cs 
40 40d'^05db- 
b- d O Hji Cl Hji Tt» 

cs"'©" cs^bTcD d^b-T 
b- 40 b- 00 rH <D 
40 o H^1 05 40 rH CO 

o^cs'd’'d'r-T ed cf 



3 

3 

© 

© 

H.9 

© 

HH 

TO^ 

• c8 
3 ^ 

O Ih 

W «a 
> p 

•«-H c8 

34 a 
.2 3 

,3 

ft 

63 

& 

o 

© 

o 


o 

5 

h) 

o 
z 
w 

HH 

o 


•S d'p 

p*n c3 © © ** 


3 

o 


CO 


3rSf © © 
0.2 > p 

.H9 iH*^ 


© 


^ ^ L_j ©o3'*'^'~wwji-9rn 

anm'^l'za weqno(i(,9iJH5 

o 63 63 

o 


ass.s«g^ 


W ^ .__ . 

o3 P b J? c3 03 p 


106 





























































































































































«OT-*Ob «.00 

CO »o ^ ^ c<» 
O 00 

1 —I iO t«» 


s 


to ^ 
^ CO ^ 

«3 tOiC 

tH<i<<Cs4 


: 2 ! £2 ^ ^^ 
£sSJ2?^^05»^»-^0i 
MCSOO'^r-tCO^OO 

oo^eo Vofi>r 

?? ^ .-H xti xcH eo «?> 






OS o o o 

^ CO Q CO Oi ^ 

O O to CO ^ to 


' *-• C^ CO 

Igsas 


OtCc^cO 
^ ^ 


to O ^ to CO 00 

S r- c<» tol-c 

04 


•^os 

t- 

fH 00 

04 04 CO 

oooooo4r- 

OSCOHjtOSOS 

COOS 

rH 10 

rH CO 

OS 04 CO 
CO ^ to 
to CO CO 

rH ts, to 

OSQQ CO rH OS 
CO 04 to CD 

04 F^ 

OS 00 0 

00 CO CO 

CS 04 'iji 
04 CO C- 

000 CS 

04 CO 
04 04 
rH 

CO rH 04 00 04" 
CO »“H rH 

rH rH 

00 " 04 " 

rH 

CO CO" rH fh" 04 
rH rH 

C0 04"rH 
to 04 t- 

04"t0 rH 
to rH 

«k 




rH 

04 

rH CO rH 


O to ^ 04 CO 


t-osoa ^ . 

o>cotoc 0 r-cot 0 ^co 
tO*^»OC4tOi-tC40>Oa 

CO i-ToTco'r^c^ VcocC 

CO CO r- C4 ^ 

C4 ^ 


^ t'. os to 
Oico C4 O 00 
^ CO 00 o r- 

cor^ to 00 


*H c5 06 

to CO TJ* 

—* » •k 

O CO tN. 


C40C4C^tOtO'«J^O«0 

t>t-C4C^w^0>»-r'O 


OS 00 to 
r^TfTr-Too 

« s 


CO 00 


05 i^ wco 


S£5S2!Soo®<55t»oc4o 
OS00O500h-i—<CO^OOCOCD 
rnr—»-^coo5r-to^cO'^^ 

oTi^ os trTtcTr^ocfr^r-rco'oo' 
tocoTf'r-oocooosososaS 
r- eo T-i 


to r- 

04 O 

<000 

to" CO* 

S'** 


ClCOOSr-i^ 04 to ^ OS to 

COtOOCrHO OStO OOCOO 

COCOC4.-IO TjiiO «OS« 

os'cTod'co »o »oco 

rH to IM 


CO to 

f-H »-t o to CO 

CO CO 00 to 00 
00 C4 CO •»<rc4 


O 04 
0*^0 
C4 to 
* «» 
1-1 04 CO 
f-H 04 T-H 


g 8 § 

O OS 

00 000 

CO CO i-H 
1-* 04 


cor^coto^ioc^^O 

coeotooocococo»-(io 

040s04c0'«j»c0t^'^c0 

tO’^COoT^OCO’co'oi' 

•-<04c0c0t0c0^^04 



04 Tft 00004 
CO ^ 04 _ 

^ OS CO OS 

to* i-Ti-Tccr-^ 
eo t- 00 00 



t0t0cor-i-^‘^04 04t0 

■^i-tOCOOSOOCOOO 

tOCQOrorTfrc^OiQOC^ 

CO‘0'^CO*OOCC>04Tt« 

to r— CO T-^ T>H 
oT 


■^e400f-'r-t-cocD'^r- 
t0i-HTfc0040SOOt0c0O 

tOOJ^I'-COt-'^WOOOSTti 

t£fTjrtCcO*'t-‘cO 00 Op 
OSOSOS04CO^COCC'CO-^^ 
rHi-*^f-'Oi-^04CO 



gp^ooost>- 
O 04 00 ^ 04 

r-- wi^ o 

CO ^"f-HO^OO" 
C4 04 O •-* CO 
rH »-4 r}4 ,-4 


»0 04 
1-1 
OS ^ 

00 OS 
^co 


CO OS 04 
04 to rH 

tQt-O. 


r^ OS 00 >^04 
r- ^ CO 00 o 

rHCO OOt-CO 

^os ofo^of 

O t>. CO CO CO 
CO^C0 04^ 

•s 

CO 


00 OS o 
^ Os os 
00 04<0 

•t •» 

to 04 »-« 
CO 1 -H to 
04 rH 


-itf< !>. 

r- 1 -< 04 

00 1-H CO 

to toco" 

CO O 00 
t-H 04 


ocoososcoor-04co 

O»O00C004rHl-H0SHft 

0004c00c00-^000 

^rHOOCOcOOSCO^OO 

eoi-H04oooo*otooto 

^ ^ r«« fH rH rH rH 


OOOOrHQ'^t- 

r- tO 0 Hf 1 

00 00 rH t- CO 0 

pfc^T to" cT co'cT 

04 rH •«»< 0 CO 

04 t- rH to CO Hj« 

230, 796 
486,099 
149, 749 

OOpHj<tOt'-C4CSOOO 

tOOPC4CSOCOtOcOC4 

t-COOt^rHC4COOSCS 

Oj‘ort004‘crrH‘'co't>^C£r 

rHC4CS<NtOi-HTj<cOC4 
rH OS Hf 05-^04 04 

CO 

rH 

OSOQCDCSCCCOC4rHC4rH(M 

CSCHHt^CSOO'^OSOC-rHCS 

tot—Tfkoeoot— cCt-4ooco 

e4'rt!'t^cc'crrH"c^crofc>rrjr 

iOOOi-HiOcsOOt-C-CSCSCO 

CCCOCO'^iO'^C<40StCtOt>. 

Hjrc4" 

p t- 

ooS 
^ 0 

CO 

0 eo 

•k 

cs 

t- rH to os 

CO Hj< oa'O 
^ CO t-\ 0 i-H 

to 0 CO cToo 

CO OS fH 06 

c<»cscscs?i 

657,721 

175,409 

24,071 

19,179 

37,163 

■ 1,933,986 

409,720 

629,245 

379, 618 

206,764 

1,109,954 

2,965,634 

1,187, 527 

961,170 

1,147,914 

806,008 

792, 284 

815,767 

2,026,815 

2,060,272 

1,636,944 

1,168, 357 

604,820 

1,185,802 

670,857 i 

rHCSOOtOQCO 
rH to P to to 

to CS 00 0 0 Hjt 

•« «k » «k «k 

rH to t— CD 0 Ht< 

CO OS rH 00 CO rH 

04 Or 04 <000 CO 

470, 713 
1,196, 496 
262, 291 

156,183 
1 , 516, 621 
145, 461 
23, 440, 624 
114,116 
1, 234,956 
513,880 
368,805 
373, 383 

506, 349 
545, 726 
463, 088 
654, 740 
810, 688 
696, 555 
6,114, 767 
4, 444, 454 
823, 706 
940,240 
1, 222,058 

CO t- 
t— 
HJI fH 

CO 0 
CO ^ 

m 

0 

t— 00 rH »0 Q 
CO rH CO CO ^ 
to 10 OS to 

00 to'ccT to" r-T 
CO to to CO 

CO COCO CO 

•k 

00 CO 
to I-. 

rH CO 

ak 

rH 

toc^ 

29,692 

37, 742 

45,092 

CD 52 <c» rH 

CO 00 to 04 
CO 00 00 cs 

«« as «k Vk 

CD ,-H »0 rH fH 
00 OS 04 HJ1 

to to cs CD CO 

»o 

04t^OS 

t— ^H 

OS CO CD 

*» ak ak 

CD 0 to 
to 0 to 
CO CO 

•t ak ak 

rH CO rH 

1,125,044 

1,483,428 

1,108,290 

947,326 

951,960 

2, 518,457 

2,915,696 

1,875,004 

1,358,402 

571,999 

1,333,308 

762,350 

674,000 
1,181,000 
301,000 
1,900,000 
1 , 688,000 
« 6 , 497,000 

opo 

S 08 

O4"cs"0p 
to t— tp 
rH 0 0 

r^ rH CO 

rH rH ^ 

8 2,061, 000 
10,416,000 
342,000 
153,831,000 

8 798, 000 

8 4, 888 , 000 

8 4,022, 000 

8 1,268, 000 
2, 393, 000 

2,17G, 000 
1.879,000 
2, 250, 000 
2, 579, 000 
2, 704, 000 
2, 354, 000 
22, 506, 000 
24, 363,000 
2,394, 000 
7,437,000 
11, 036, 000 

1 

1 

43,994,000 ' 

869,000 1 

1 

1,931,000 
1,495,000 

6 , 460, 000 

2,062,000 

2,463,000 

§s 

0 0 

•t at 

»0 04 
t- OS 
CD 0 

•k •k 

C4 rH 

2,435,000 

866,000 

1,289,000 

11,655,000 

1,116,000 

2, 713,000 

822,000 

478,000 

4,020,000 

8,130,000 

5,646,000 

4,790,000 

12, 284,000 

4,617,000 

6,193,000 

1,310,000 

7,327,000 

20,297,000 

4,552,000 

3,311,000 

766,000 

6,648,000 

3,140,000 


s 

OS 


r- 


CO 

cs 

CO 


o CO CO 00 
00 oC OS OS CO 
t- 04 CO 

04"co"i-h"«^*' 


r- 


to 


^<0 o OS 04 CO 

oco 00 dp 00 

»HOO«OOOCS 


C4t;^’VOS00 

r— ^ 

04 




CO 

o 

•k 

CO 


to rH 
to CD 
t- C4 

rH 0 0 to 

C- CD OS op rH 

CS 00 ^ to 

000 

CO 04 
00 ^ 

cs 0 rH 
r- CS OS 
OOSM* 

CO CD toes to 
0 CS CO 00 00 
t- M CO 0 CS 

OS M4 P 
X P Mt 
X Osh- 

0 1-<X 

0 cs p 

OS X ^ 

rH 
C4 
CD CD 

00 to OS OS 

to rH to 00 *-< 

C4 rH to C4 C4 

^ ak 

rH CS 
CD 0 
ot- 

cs to fh' 
to cs M< 
CO CO to 

to CD tCCS Mi' 
rHMtCSOt*- 
“5 00 tH toes 

p’eSMi' 
P X M< 
rH rH 0 

SxS 

PM< rH 

0 

CO 

•k 

ak 


CO 

•k ak ^ 

rH P X 

S CS 

to rH 
to CD 
t- C4 

hr rH 0 0 to 
t- CD CS 00 rH 
OS ^ 00 to to 

00 
P CS 
0 cs 

CSOrH 

r- cscs 
OOSM< 

CO P to OS to 
0 cs CO X 00 
t- M' eo 0 cs 

a> Ml p 
X P M< 
X OS tH 

0 rH X 
0 CSCS 

csxcs 

fH 

04 
CD CD 

ak «k ak a, 

00 to CS CS 
to rH to OC rH 

M ^ to C4 CS 

CD 0 

or- 

CS to r-l 

to cs Mt 

CO CO to 

ak ak ak •k ak 

to CO Ch cs M* 
rH -la* CS ot^ 
to X t- PCS 

P os'k^ 

P X M 
rH rH C? 

Pk ak ak 

0 1H 0 
P X P 
P M* rH 

•k 

0 

CO 

ak 

•k 


to 

i-TtOCO 

A *« 

» CS 

00 00 
OS eo 

rH HJ* 

CS rH to to 
rHr-tO'<a<t>- 

*0 00 ^ to 0 

04 Ml 
CD 0 

rH <0 

M< cs CO 
CD p 00 

r-p to 

OS OS cs P CO 
t- 0 cs M 0 

M* 00 CS OS CS 

fH rH p 

rH X P 
XXX 

Ml OS X 
M rH X 
CS X P 

HT "la* 
OOS 
CO 00 

oo'io 

to CD r- op to 
to cs 'itfi p 0 

mTo 

CO rH 
CO 0 

CO‘ os to’ 
cs cs c- 
00 cs 00 

tC CO CO P Ml 
P p rH M* CS 

r- p M< OS 0 

C4 0 CO 
X CS M< 
P Ch CS 

P X P 
P M l>k 
P CS t» 

tO"TH 

00 

cs fh"cs csco 


*k 

cs rH FH 

^ m. — 

CO CS M» rH rH 
CS 

tc <0 oT 

»—4 

<0 <d 40 


co-^r-cooor- 

CO O O OS CO to 
00 O OS t- 04 O 

O os" o" 04 " to 

O OS CO H}< t- Q 

^ to CO O M» O 


04 r- cp 
to 04 
O CO 


toiotoi-Htotor-ooos 

t-iotocooot>rg^Hro 


CO CO to 


04 


04 


go 1 -H OS O OS 
ooi-HTt*ii»-r- 
CO 00 00 to CO 


t- CO 04 r- 
OS 04 o 04 
to 00 HJ4 ^ 


tooo 

COCO Ht< 

to CO CO 

i-T ^ 


osHfcoor-r-OJooo 

COr-tOrH^lOHfOl-H 

coo-cc*ocoosr-cooo 


r-cocpcot-oo»or-toooto 

'^^OCO^O>tOOOOi-HQ 

cotocotor-^oooooocsco 


CO 


OS 

00 


04 


CO OS 
04 


04 


<0004AQOOSH«4t>*io 
COgpOS04 04cOi-H'i*i*H< 
■VC4rHCOi-HtOf-l04» 

OoTcOCO'^^OroOC^ 

osr-t^O'9*i-tcor-o 

r-*^e0’^»-io0i-^04® 

04 r— ^ rH 


CO r- CO 
CO Q O OS 
00 O OS t- 

r-ososoo 4 r- 
O OS CO t- <0 
^ »0 CO O HT 04 


04 r- o 
to 04 04 
O ^ CO 

i 2 o"o" 

CD CO 

to CO <0 


04tOi-Hi—'OStOCOi-Ht- 
O4tOtOCOCD»O0pHj*CO 

t0'^otoo40‘ooor- 


OS o- o r- Q to 
CO r- to rH CO ■»r 
CO t- CD to CO OS r- 


ooi-HOsoosM'cor-coo4r- 
O0i-Hrt<^r-OCDOS04004 
tO 


COOOoOtOcOOSOtOOO’-tf’^H 


00 


cor-Tootot-tooo^ 
co^ostoopQ*r'g 


t- CO 


CD 


OS 

CO 


04 1-H 


CO OS 
04 


04 


t;-c004000»0-^00t0 
CO ^ r— r— to rH r— ^ 
tOrH00CO00tOrHO4^ 

00 04 CO r-Tco'CO oT rn'c^ 
i»H00*OHt«tO04CD04O 
OO’^'^COrHOOrHCOU? 

04"r-"^ ^ 


Ht«cotorHoor- 

^ CO to CO ^ rH 
CO os t- 00 CO Hjt 

* ^ ^ tk «k 

CO OS OS 
04 OS r- 
CO OS CO 

•k _ •s 

rHC 4 coeor- 


to CO r- 
<0 04 —< 
r-coco 

■k #k •k 

r- to Q 
00 O CO 
rH 04 OS 

co'r'Tco' 

1 -H rH ^ 


tOCO04tOHfirHC0COp 

Or-rHiOOOrHCD-iJlO^ 

O-OtOrHCOOHjlCOrH 

c^ e<r oT co" rH*" co rn' 

wSOHfHoOtogpoQHfcp 

ior-i-Hr-o40C4C4t25 


r-r-r-ot^osOrHoso4to 

COCOCOOOCO»OCOt004HjiOO 

t^tO0S04C0Hj'00OtOC0i-H 

OrrH'‘oscroforto"»OCO»OCO 


cocoos'vitf*r-co«Dto 

C0O04r-rHlOrH000S 

OOrHCOCOOOOSrHtOOS 


COOSCOr-040-^CDO 


00 


op H»< 
to HJ 1 


04 00 


CO 

CO 

04 


OS CO 04 CO 

•D «> W 


C004COCO'^'itf<04 00HfirHCO 
to CO rH rH 


0004 rs. 04 00 
. _ CO 00 OS 000 s 

OSO-O400tOH»(kOCOHjl 

< 0 " 04‘‘04"Grt-"io"rH00 V* 

rH CO 


cs cs P rH p P 

X ® 0 0 P M« 
cs 0 X to rH X 

X P cs 

rH t>. P 
CS CS r- 

CSXXPPCSM'prH 

XrHXPCSOl^prH 

0>XPrHXCSt-00 

Ph-rHPt>rpt-rHOM‘X 

XPM*M*POt— rHFHprH 

t-PCsXOCSXe4M^XX 

cs r- 
r- X 
X cs 

XX X X 
cs P P P M* 
Mt cs X M< 0 

X X 
C- P 

cs cs 

X M* P 
0 0 X 
X X © 

oxpes rH 
f- © p p 0 
X © P M* P 

X cs © 

© rH P 

cs r- © 

XrHt- 
t- p p 
© p p 

©CSX©©CSrHXX 

Pt-XMI©CSI-.©CS 

•VPXPXrHXM*© 

CO CO CO rH OS rH 

M< OS rH X M* P 

CS P OS P 0 M* 

X rH t— 

0 P X 
CS CS CS 

cs" Mi' p" cs" cTp" p" cT OS 

XXM'CSPCSCSt-rH 
PCSpHi-hCSihXCSP 

0 OO'r-rp’eO’HjTx'CS cs 00 r-l 
M<PXCSXPt-P^M<X 

xcsxr-csoo^oxx 

M< OS 

a< as ak a. ak 

pt—ppr— 
P Cs X cs P 
p cs P P 0 

x'r-" 
t- cs 

X © 

Mi'xTT 
cs X X 
X cs X 

ak a. a» a> ^ 

©t-t-t-c- 
X p cs M* © 
Oi P M» © i-t 

©CStH* 
X M* rH 
p © © 

tr" Tj? t-' 

g§g§ 

P P 00 CO 00 P rH ©“rH 
©M<XX©©rHO© 
©C-PXPPPXP 

#H CS eoM^'r^ 

a. ak ak 

X t- X 

rH rH ^ 

«o <« 

c^odrH“cri-H’'orcd'cs"eo‘ 

«o ^ ^ « CO ao «D 

CO'cs"00“CO M*'M^CO OO Mi F-rp' 

P X rH rH 

ak ak 

P f-H 
00 

0 

csrH oTcsx" 

Ml" cs" 

cs’ rH rH 

ak * ak ak 

X cs Ml rH rH 

cs 

<© to 0 

to* <0 40 

a> ak ak » ak ak 

pCSCSrHt-PrHXM* 

rHCO 


Ih 

.2 

73 


§m 




<0 

o 

a 

o 

T3 

> 

o 

u 

Ph 

• • 

T3 


•o 




q; cy 


® ^ w 3 
o bfl a,j ^ 
a o'w 

M rH 

Ih O 

o 

.a 


OQi 


2 
H 

< 

>-] 

i-4 

Q 
p 

rn • • 


e te- a 


J—< 

o 


w 


—» • 03 

‘ » O O rtk ^ 2 ' Cf 3 

k. k. hr J3 2 


^ H '3 3 B 

gS&go«igg^g-g««c 

Ih CJ 3 © © •—! o C.4-S O 

^^Zb'^<inZZZPimP>< 

© © 

:z; 12 ; 


u p 

§5 
t> a 
© 


a 

. © 

p © 

<^3 


Ih 

© 

CO 


03 

I 

p-p-p 

P 

S3 


■T' w as © 5 •*»»«« 

iias,jq’C'g,c3.-tS©^ 

G<1<JPPOW»SP4f^pHM 

p 


p 

p 

© 

04 


w P 
a ® 

p 

< 1 ? fe 


© 

Ih 

Ih 

C3 

m 

$ 

CO 

© 

M 


«< 

fii 

H 

w 

o 

w 

Eh 

p 

o 

:z; 


*0 


© 
^ W) 

§ o 


• • *3 I— © 
.»;« 0.0 
oOco.g 
O 


as CO ^ © 

© £^3 fl 3 
S ^ © © 

as 

3 4H -Hd (m 
W lH»rt 3 tH 

> o a o ^ 
WP^SccE-' 


CO 

.a.t5 

OQ 

CO P 

© o 

o 


>t 

o 


CO c3 5 

^ *3 

W ©X3 


«gg'-2a^.S£g-a§-3a"gg"-a .sgs®l« 

|M^^2PSO(§ta gPSS gMm 2 o<;QOCiOP 

S .2 5 .2 e-~ 

MS S S 


CO 

'V 

•rH 

p< 

03 

Ph 

" © 1^ -- 

■0.2 § « 




3 

Q. 

ce' 

© 

p 


p 

a 


cs 

-9 
© 

r-, '9 
'^.20 

I.N « 





©ja 

ZO 


452436 


107 


See footnotes at end of table. 






















































































































































# 


^0 

3 

C 


0 

u 


0 

Q 

C 

Q 

O 


Cl 


o 

li. 

0 

k. 

K 

z> 

S 

S' 

k 

"B 

c 

3 

3 

*M 

c 

kl 

0 

-3 

S 

3 

S 

3 

4*^ 

Vi 

•m 

Vi 

Vi 

3 


Ot. 

•ca 

£5 


S t^t^o 
»0 Oi ^ 
lO •"( t>> CO 

^ 10 (^ 00 " 


OOOC^CO 


»0 CO 

»> 

»o 


CO 

CO 


CO lO o 
^ ic »0 CO 


00*^05 
00 CO !>• 
Oi IC 

^ 

;3 Si 


o> 


lOt^OO 

coco 


T—» ^ 

^ c^oo 
O 1 ^ 

CO CO o 
lO ^ 


g qp CO y? ^ 


. I o> lo CO 

!>- t"- t 

coco^oco V 
no o5co 


»o c^ 
>• CO 00 o> 
:-^ f-4 io CO 




o 

o 

fl 

03 

<*■» 

OT 

CO 


c 

3 

a 

Q. 

© 

s 

fi. 

>1 

•4-a 

3 

o 

•o 

p. 

CO 


© 

o a 

■*i» -H 
<1 


h» lO OJ 1-H 

O Oi 

coco 00 

«? CO CO oT 
^woo 


Oi 

C4 CO 

^ o 


r O 
I »o 

■ o 


<N 


CO 


«* vs 1 •k 

!?: 

I 
I 
t 
I 
I 


CO 

1 

t 

b- b- X 

Cl t>. ns ns X 05 

CD Cl Cl 

1 

t 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

t 

t 

1 

1 

P 

i 

1 X 

Tfxnsf-t'^nsFHX 

rH'Ffxxnscicox 

NnscD'Ff05XXt>- 

CD X 


1 

CD ns Cl 

0 0 r- ns Cl Cl 
0 0 X X 

05 Cl CD 

1 

1 


1 

1 

« 


1 05 

Ff 'Ff 

0 

1 

ns t^. ns 

05 fH CD 

1 




t 

r 


1 CD 

05 fH 

CD 

1 

1 

05 X 

«« ««».•» p« 

XClCDXgFH 

XCl 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

I 

1 

J 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

■ CD 

1 

t 

FH CD 0 ni C5 05 CC 

X X 


t 

1 

05 

1 

1 




1 

1 

1 

1 


^onso^X'ifFH 

tF.X 


1 

1 

1 

t 

1 




1 

t 

1 

1 

t 




1 

1 

) 

• 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 


1 

1 

1 

1 

1 




^ Q a 

o © S 

xj qs 
••-• © ra 
•< P.jq 
' © o 
'O 


CO CO o 
CO OCO iO 
00 ^ 

lo co^co^od 

CVIC^OOC^ 

^ W 0> *H 


O-l o 

»0 00 Tt< 05 
CO c^ 

S '^oTt^ToT 

CO 05 t^ 
CO 


CO O CO 

o o t^ 

00 CO 

*M lO 

»o *c o 


*-H lO 05 

*o 

o »c »o 
CS 

00 CO 
»0 CO 


O O 1-H t>. CO CO 

g c^ CO 05 iO CO 
00 00 6) O rH 

t^ododod>^'*‘or 

fH CO 




CO O 
. ^ 
C^ T-t 

co"t>ror 

lO CO 


CO 


<N 

»o 


& 


05 


00 •«»* 00 ^ CO 

lO 00 CO CO CO CO 
CO »0 »0 •-"M 05 


00C^t^C0C^O501O 
OTt<i-Hi-HlOC^C>^t^ 
CO c^ •-< 


CO 

§ 

•k 

00 


CO 00 O •-! 
O 00 CO 
TT^OSOO 
^ 

c<0*-<05 
^ CO 


CO »0 ^ i© CO GO CO 05 o 

C^ ^ CO CO CO no 00 f-H t>. 

05 CO ci C^ ^ O Cl 05 I-H tN. 

00 c© I© i-TofoTocd* Qco 

't^05 05 ^CO 

0^ Tt* 1 -H ^ T»< CO r-t ri*^ 


© 

© © 

tc a 

« flC 

sS 


00 00 CO 

t—I CO 05 
CO 05 CO 05 

tfoTus cd 

05 1-t o 

,-( ^ ic d 


S CO CO 

01 00 
05 »—I 05 00 

cdcf coo 

CD 05 -H 01 

C<1 cit>. 


ns X 05 X 
CD 0 05 
FH 05 05 

X X If. 

c- ns 
X ns 0 

Cl 0 CD CD Cl Cl 
CO X 0 'Ff FH X 
CD tF. ns CO X FH 

X ns 0 

X 'Ff ^ 

X 05 0 

t- tF. X ns 0 

tF» FH t-F If» 0 

Cl OX FH s 

1 

1 

t 

t 


1 

iX 
t 1—4 

lO 

PCOXXXOfhX 

Cinsusoxxnsoo 

OX-^cD05XCDX 

050 
05 tF. 

ns 

■Ff oTcdcd 

05 FH CO 

FH Cl FH Dl 

fH ^ 

X tF- Q 

'Ff 0 

ns tFr©COO 
Cl fh ns W t- X 
CD 

FH tdci* 

Cl ns X 

ns ns cdoToT 

Cl ns 'Ff X 0 

FH FH N. X t— 

t 

1 

1 

1 


Icf 

1 ^ 

1 fH 

X x" CD" fh" x" x" -Ff 

C1-S405CDC1fhXX 

OOfFpCD-FfOCluS 

•» 

CO 

XOQ 

0 00 






1 

1 

1 

1 

1 


1 

1 

I 

1 

1 

*• «k As 

^ ^ CO ^ 

«k 

Cl 


t>» CO Q D1 

O CO O 1-1 


-H Ttl CO CO 

CO CO CD cs 

l>- 00 -H 


CO CO Cl 'Ft' 

O CD o ^- 

00 CD 00 t- 


CO n5 05 
05 lO 
05 00 1-1 


'Ff't'-C^OOCOt'- 
Cl O CO 05 05 !>. 
CD DJ Cl CO CD CD 


00 CO Cl 
no 05 
*0 CO t- 


00 05 
»—• 05 
O X CD 


CD X Q 
o »0 00 X 

•Ft* 05 


T-H 05 O 1-H X no o no ns 
lO^rHOi-HCDX® nocft 
CD Cl CO X 1—'I'-CD X^ 


s 

05 If- If. ns 

0 Cl Ff Hf 

fF- FH 05 ns 

^t^o 

X 

•f •> 

?2 

Cl CD 0 

ns cf CO 

X ns CO CD 

05 

Cl 0 FH t-- 

'^coXXClcD'Ffns 

^ «k 

0 X 

0 

X X X 0 

X X fH -Ff 

•Ff 05 05 'Ff 

Cl X X 

X 

Cl GO 

X X -Ff 

t-- ^ r— 

•Ff ns Ff 0 

0 

fh X 

TfnS05CDFHXC105 

Q X 

t-. 

CO ns ns Ff 

ns fH X 

Cl Cl FH X 

0 fH 0 



GO 


^4 fH tL 

If* 

Ff 

•Ffns05XO'FfFflF- 



4^ 


Cl 


cc 


Cl 


X X 


Cl 


tn 

a 

3 

© 

3 

3 


g 

© 

© 


V3 


c3 


c Cit 
*3 O 


u 

c, 


a 

3 

CO M 

u i? 

cQ 


s'S ®“* 

Si 

O ^ 


0^ 


Cl r«- Cl CD 
X 05 05 tx. 
X Cl X 


oooo 
o ooo 
oooo 

•k 

o 

X n5 X X 
X O 05 o 


1 C ^ t>.co 
i-( Q X *-» 
t>i CD 05 CD 


ns X O 
XXl'* 
''9' 


Cl i-< X CD ns ns 
X X X CO X o 
ns •Ft' " 1 ^ IC o X 


X X CD 

X o 1-1 

X CD Cl 


X t'- X Cl X 
CD •-< X X f-« 
I'* ns 05 ns 


O 05 2 


o 

t'- 


_ -FJ* 

X 


nst>-*^}*.-^OClXCO 
ClCDXXt'«-X'^ “ 
'Ft' X 00 CO o 05 o 




Cl 


X -H 


X 


X 'Ft’ 


^ ^ fh D1 ^ ^ 

X f-t 


ns X 


^ Vi Q 
^ M ^ 

^ o 


Ofe 


».• 

bts 

o 

u 

fU 


Ji 

2 

3 

H 


© 

© 

2 

© 

a 

© 

o 


Is 

^2 


Cl 

Cl 

ns 

si 


CD 

'Ft' 

X 


W F -4 

<Q 


03 

•4^ 

o 


$341,617 
360,692 
3,726,590 
280,616 

76,728 

9,713 
289,286 
958,301 

CD X f- X 
CD 05 X X 
X tF- 05 05 

ododx'Ff 

CD CD X 05 
X fH 

0 

565,402 
64, 340 
1,679, 644 

0 X Ff 0 CD X 
5 CO 05 05 X 0 
X X fh CD © 

'^FH'FfOCltF. 
ns X X X ns FH 

90,178 
85,825 
139,373 

173, 424 
1,504 
151,831 
261,427 

If. 0 CO 

XXCD fH 

CO X tF. X 

Cl 0 Ff 

0 X 'Ff 0 CD X 

X ns X 

"Ff Ff tF- tF 

fH fH 0> fH 

Cl FH X 0 

CD 05 X X 

0 ■Ff 

^ CD 05 05 X 0 

tF- Cl tF. 

Cl 0 t- Cl 

ns Cl ns CD 

tF- tF. Cl X 

X tF. 05 05 

Hf X CD 

X X FH CD 0 

FH X X 

Ff US FH rf 

•. 

fh CD 0 

nS05 05X 

GO 06 X 'Ff 

ns Ff 05 

^ A 

^ fh Ff 0 Cl tF. 

•k •• •» 

0 ns 05 

*. •- •- 

X fH X FH 

•^ CD Cl X 

tF. X ns 

CD CO X 0> 

CD CD (F- 

»0 X CO X ns FH 

0 X X 

t- ns <D 

^X tF. Cl 

Cl 05 

X fh 

0 

ns CD 



fH fh Cl 


'Ft' ns 'Ff' X 

Ttl X -Ft* X 
CD 1-1 X O 

»-i 05 ns t>- 
X -H X t>- 
X 


Cl X X -Ff 
X CD ns X' 
O ns Cl O 


Cl 05 CO 
X O nS 

Cl -H o 


X 


Cl 


XOsXCD^X’FfX 

-FfCDXnsOSOST-^CD 

0'FfnsciI'^05i-<0 


X Cl 


^ X ^ 


t'-Cl 
Cl 05 
X t"- 

Cl 


'5» ns X 

X 'Ff X 

CD 1 -* X o 

fh 05 ns i>. 

X -FXt>. 
X 


Cl 05 X 

?52i 


Cl X X -Ff o 
X CO ns X o 
O ns Cl O Cl 


X05XCDi-^X’FfX 

S CO X ns 05 05 I-F CO 
Ff ns Cl h- 05 fh <D 


Cl 

tF. 


X 


XCl 


fH X 


X 


t^Cl 
Cl 05 
X t>- 

cf 


cs 

•4^ 

o 


X CD t'F 
X "Ff 05 X 

ko US ns r- 


Cl Cl 05 ^ 
fH 


05 05 h- 

o t- -Ff Cl 

ns ns t'- 


05 X 05 t- 

CD ns X ns 

1 -^ "Ff t- 


X ns X 
05 -< o 
X Cl X 


•Ff US CD X 05 ns 
1-1 !>. Cl X X 
ns CD 1 -H ns X ns 


4 

CD^X C 

«k •«> 

D 05 

«k ^ 

fH FH 0 CD 

X ns 05 

ns 05 CD X "f X 

X . 

s 

X 05 < 

5 X 

X CD t- ns 

Cl X tF 

t- X Q t- Cl CD 


s 

^ 1-4 ns 'Ff 

0 05 ns fh 

X Cl fH 

CD Ff ^ CD 05 X 

OC 


CO X ns 

X CD CO 

t'— ^ F^ 


05 

Cl 

■Ff 


•Ff FH fH CD Cl -Ff Cl 


05 


•Ff FH ns X O 
Cl Cl ns Cl o 
"Ff ns o Fi o 

‘Ff'x ns o cf 

X r- X ns Cl 
O CO X F^ 

X cicfci 


O X ^ ns 
ns 05 CH>. 

OO “Ff t>. 
Ofh 

X X ^ ^ 
Cl X t>- 


$ 


05 05 Ff fh ns-Ff X X CO 

Ot'F^^05 05F-4 nSFH 

XnSF^XOSXt- oci 

CicfnsQXcDcd'Ff nfci 
fh 05 CD ns CD X CD I'-fh 
05X X tF. X X ns Cl uSfh 

cdcfCltflCtFr«DX onf 

ns ^ fh fh 


F-. 

3;S-Oa « 
-^Xi 3 > a 
£ 3 © *c S 
^ a 0,5 


t'F X 'Ff X 
FH o 05 X 
t>. X ^ 

rfx“x nf 

I—I ns ns tF* 

O Cl Cl ns 
» 

Cl Cl 05 fH 
fH 


05 »c fh ns 
t'F Cl o o 

!>• F-i X 05 


00 X Cl ns 
Cl o -Ff fh 

X t- 'Ff ns 


CD 05 Cl 
X t'F X 
—4 fH X 


-Ff Cl Cl Cl X 
fh Cl 05 05 'Ff Tf 

ns Cl X X t- 


Cl i>. 
"Ff 05 Ff 
fH fH 05 


O 05 FH fH ^ 
ns FH FH Q X 
FH X X o 


ns US -Ff Cl 

S X Cl X 
05 -Ff X 


CD 05 0 ns 

Ff ns CD t- 

CD 0 1-4 

ns 05 tF X fh fh 

tF tF 05 

x’ tn" c 

S X t'^ 

ns CD 0 

0 

X 05 ns ns 

'f fH Cl X 

X ns 

tF 0 0 05 tF 

0 X X 

X tF ? 

J5 1 - ns 

05 fh 'f 


fh CD CD 

OOCDCl 

Ff Cl Ff 

CD ns 0 tF 05 X 

ox 

FH CD X t* fH 

tF CO X 

tF 


'^fHfHCD ClFHFfCl 


05 


^ fFfh^ X ClClCl 


05 t- FH Cl X o no FH FH CD 

00 CD CD X OO X Cl X CD FH 

t"- FH O O X FH FH <D Ff Cl 

O nfxFf" ns edoT ns <dcf 

C1XXCDC1050X ns FH 
Cl 05 X t'F fh e*s CD ^ CD fh 

oTci Cl f'^Qdtfcdx o^ns 
ns w ^ fh 


*3 

3 

a 

© 

•4^ 

03 

■*-s 

CO 

o g 

i 2 
> 3 
zi ca 

© iH 

3=^ 

p. 

g 

bJO 

o 

© 

o 


'3 

© 

3 

-S 

a 

o 

o 


nS 

< 

3 

H 

25 

o 

H 

Pi 

o 

2 


© 
© 

03 3-^ 


• • »3 O 5 © 
3 W W g § 

« a'2^'3 


ta 

H 
3 
o 
w 

p 

en 

z 

3 

H 

p 

o 

OQ 


< 

3 

H 

z 

» 


03 

B 

03 

XJ 

CO 


e 

03 
X 
bP 

■9;;h 

pqS 


© 


t 

3 

o 

•w 

bfi 

3 

• l^ 

X3 

CO 

03 


3*^ 

o • • 

®3 

be‘SC 

3-9 

li 

^c5 

• • V4 

© o 
g © « 

05 

©.£2 0 
QQpsi 


© 

a 

> 

3 

o 



*3 •<J k! • • 

CG 9 ^ 

§.2 S 

o P 3 



a 

3 

2 


CO 52 


<» 


TS 

I 3 © 

M OM 

••S|g 

.»o3,_f 00330.— O 

gqH£w,g.S^rt« 

M ^ 

© .3 

e > 


^ Cl 4.5 FF 
‘ ^ § p 


3 

o 

-4.H 

be 

3 

3 

3 

w 

• • 

.9 

be 

.3 

> 


CO 

© 


*© 


o 

jr— ^ 

be'3 © 

.. p 3 3 

. 2 < 1 ^§ 

.ghPOcQ 

'3 

o 


>» 


<=> 

© © ^ 

CO > p © 

O *© 3 ^ 

Sa 0:35 

© osrj 3^ 

•fH L^F-i Q 

QCl ••QjPi -w 
o^ ca w 


3 
o © 


3 3^3 

ca ca 03 


CQ 3 


03 

a 

o 

© 

ca 


o 

FT2 © TO c8 


108 






















































































































































u 

c3 

O 


c 

C3 

•a 

c3 


S 

o 

o 

CQ 

o 

o 

03 

>» 

Xi 

T3 

> w 
o o 


•t^ 

a 

<x> 


a 

K 

O) XI 


fl 
O 

c 

C3i4 
9 a 


<o 

a 

o 

9 


<0 

U4 

a 

O) 

u 

4> 

J3 

03 

03 

o 

• * 

a> 

b4 

o 

a 


c 

03 

O 


9 i; 


c 

cO 


^T? 

ccS 

to 03 
2 ♦-> 
ge 

^ o> 
O'O 
o 9 

,S3 

o 


9. 


92^ 

0« W rt Qi 

05.-*5^5 2 

S b « 

&co2 « S 

^*3*05 ^ 
■g g "S-a 

a >*S 

■2 2 os-gtt 

02 fc-;S 0.t; 

9*9 £ 

9 m 

OS 5- CO w 

O bO P O ® 

s-a^::' 


e3 

CQ 

o 

>* 

4^ 

»M 

u 

o 

;9 

4^ 

CO 

03 

0> 

s 


9 

9 

o 

O 

u 

o 

a 


o o 


u 

o 


ce 08 

_ 4> 

ag"-*" 

2J-S-504 04. 

CJ c^-c U«. 

CO "q CO 3«2 
o 2 o 
*9 £ £. 

3 25 9 9 . 

O -H O b£ bJD 

O w 5 *fo £ ^ 


73 

© 

4^ 

O 

' 9 

‘O 

.2 

© 

li4 

03 


O 

9 

O 

• pi4 

4^ 

03 

• bi 

a ^ 

rt o 

c 


2*9 

« SL 

OJ ^ 

p 

«g 

o 


*9 

© 


M« Qj 


© 

9 


’ CO 

' £ 

I 3 

’•=§ 

I cj (> ■■” 

I a _ CO 

; S 03 a 
I bi> fc © 

' 9'C.t2 

;^C=4 © 

’-2 -9 

^ 4-» 

I o 

r. 

*9 

^ O P 
© « 03 
' 

® 9 

u © 

-■s| 

■? c P* 

3 9 

CO O* 

bo © 
-9 CO¬ 
ES 

03 C 

© © 

o ■' 


CO 

9 
_ O 

>» w 
o S3 
c.ft 

a-s 


© 

CO 

9 

O 

CO 

u 

© 


CO 

&£ 

9 


CO 


o 

E-* 


© 

4^ 

o 

9 

4^ 

o 

£ 

© 

Ii4 

03 


•9 

© 

© 

9 


.2 


9 

O 

© 

b4 

© 

4J 

CO 


9 

o 03 
9i © 

O o 

CO 

bX> ^ 

P’S 

'S’S 

a'3 

03 


9 

© 

CO 

© 


O 

9 


S 


CO 


9 *7^ 


a 

*9 

03 


03 

<«a 
P°2ia 

O. P* C8 03 

flS 0< 9 © tH 

" 03 O,” © 

5 ®-Ji 9 © 
bo © 
c8 © ^ 

£ on 

©.2 

9 


© 

*-• _ 
03 > 
O 


© 


«a 

9*9 

03 

© 

© 

9 


© > 

2 c 

9 4^ 
i- '9 


C. ® 

® is 

IM © . 

CO <1 

2p-, 

, • -j 3 
4f co^ 

CQ © 

^ © >» 

® "S 

<0 X 

ats 
'p £ 
53 
Q. 
O 


© 


9 

O 

CO 


^ 9 
^2 


© 


© 

CO 


<-.■9 


a 

© Qh © 

- - .^ 03 9 9 

© w • •■ cj © 

»- o w © 'b 9 


- 

>>co 

Im C> 

o 


© 


> K o w ©'b X 

=to"a^S255 

Sfl-aslas-g' 


© 

© 


2 P*'© t? bo 

sgw^5H*S2 

5^-4 o- - - 0.9 


o 

u 

a 


00 

Os 


0 

k, 

0 

C 

0 

2 .. 

(M 

•V 

«Q 

s 

0 

2k 

0 

2k 

K 

0 

o 

h. 

"0 

•tX* 

S' 

t 

s 

Vi 

t 

•w 

ti 

im 

Q 

C 

0 

ki 

c 

9 

ki^ 

Vi 

Vi 

Vi 

9 

4k 

9 

k) 

•M 

2k 

a, 

9 


4k 

9 

S 

0 

I 


I 

u 

'o 

H 


©40 

«85 

>2 
*r P 

.f- 9 


W5 

o» 

S 

05 

o 


’4t< o c^ »o 

CO i-H 

CO c^ o c^i 


cso5co4««c^»-itc.-tts.r>.t^ 

eooooooo5coc>»t>»t'-<oi>- 

'000’4j‘r'«oO’^’^o»ob'CD 


05 0.-^ C4 05 Ub 00 50 CD CX) Cvi 
OC ^ CO CO O 50 o O 50 «—I »o 
coc^r- COi>-■»!»< f-H ^CO CD05 


00 CO 05 ^ 

® *-< cs 


50 50 ^ 
CO 05 


00 




00 »0 <4^ 1-4 D« 
•-4 O 50 50 t>> 


“:§85 


0Q-H-Hr-c0‘49’O5i-H5o 
© 00 CO c4 




8 

ci 


»0 05 

2 da 


_ -- 00 

cD-^or- 


s 


© 

*9 

9 

9 


X) 

9 

Ph 


s 

9 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

« 

3 

9 

9. 

o 

© 

a 

>5 


© 

*© 

© 

a 

03 


© 

x: 

5 P 

4>A 

-92 


CD 

•4t< 

50 

o 

00 


00 O CD 50 50 
•4f< CO CO CO 
r-1» 00 CD 4^1 

iXio" 50 CD 


t>-0QO«DCSC0C0 00 00‘^C005 

S OOCO — t^’«t>|>.0st>»00505 
OX<'i^t^CDC^CDOi-<XiiO 

gCDO05500rcDc00ri-r«D05 


S 4^1 CO 
CD CO 
r- 50 CO 

dg*-' 


50 00^CDi-4iOO00X* 
»-405 »-iCO»05050i-hCO 
05C400 00‘^'«f<050-k< 


1^ O ^ 50 
50 o 


50 05 CO -k* 
C4 


05 00C0005QCO 

CO o> 1 ^ 50 00 

r-t-05 CO 05 00 05 

S ^OCD ofoo CnT-^ 
t>-50 CO 00 h-» 


9 C3 

o © S 

•*-> -b »-• 

*9 P2 
♦•4 © r9 
< 9.^ 
© © 
'V 




t>. 

CO 

P 

P 

P 

00 

00 


fl¬ 

P 

p 

Tp 

p 


oe 

P 

p 

o 

p' 

9" 

P 

«ft 

Q 

*1 

•ft 

00 

p 

d 

o 

t- 

P 

CO 

p 

CO 

CO 







T»550pr-oo-^c^oc^oococD 

C0COC^r-0500'4f<C0Ot>-CD0550 

05i-H»-lC0»-4OC^O^'^5O-^00 


t^50 50wC^D4r<-00 
I 00 05 CD »0 O 


s 


I D5 ^ Oi Dl 
105 r- <N 1-H 
I i-H 04 D4 


CD CD 05 
50 O 50 
»0 f-4 05 

CD c4“cD 

SS2 


50 05 O 
05 CO 05 

-H ^ 


»0 P 05 04 00 
O 05 CO 00 

50 00 i-H o «5 




i-H 05 C4 CD 05 'k* -H 
O -4 05 00 »0 CO *D 
1^ CD ^ 00 CO 


—^ 05 CO I—* ^ 05 _ 

'^-Hoor-r^x^O’^p 

t- CO T»t ^ 1-4 c5 


_ ^S^SScS 

1-4 ^ ^ rH »-4 C4 ^ 


© 

© © 
W9 
© © 

Td-© 

3'^ 

w © 
© 


© 

4J 

o 


p 

CO P P O 

p 

O P- Tp p 

d 

CO P CO P t- 

50 

50 f-< P tX P 

00 

-4 CO d d P 

t- 

•ft 

TP 

^4 

CO P I-H P -4 


5DpC4X'r5'OCOCOt^COi-4 
C4 P O C4 Oi-O CO C4 D4 50 p 
pD4C0C000i^50C0O50C4 


-^CCOOCOPPOOQOOO 
5.0 0PC*4--t-l--cD-H 
'^t^t-COOOi-Hb-OOCO 


•4j<00t^ 
D4 50 00 
00 P C4 

CO-^00 
^ 00 t- 
C4 50 


PCOiOC4P*-.i-hO-^ 
*-iC4505Ot>.00C4C4O 
coi-Hppot^cor--^ 

Or'4f-Hrf<“cOOC4‘50,X 
TJ55OC^Pt>»PPC0P 
1-4 1-4-4 10 1-450C^C< 

— •• •. 

—4 50 -H 


c> 501-4 p o p r- 

eooooPpPco 

O *k* 1-41- 00 OC l>- 

p ^ jX gl" 50 pd 


50 
CO ^ CO 


05 !■- 
'tfi cs 

•4 


»o 

00 

p 


50 00 00 P CO 
<0 I-- 50 CO 

-4 50 1-ir- o5 

CDOdcX -4-4 
05 CD CO -4 
CO CD -4 p 


PCOC^t>*t>*COi-4-4|N.O-^»0^ 

P005Oi-4pCO5O5OpCOi-4O5P 

p-^OO-VWOOOOMi-icOOP 

od'^c4^»oortXcX5o^<^cctC-4 

-4 05-450 -4p-4t>.C0t^50OC0 
COPPt-50 00PC005D)pi-400 

CD -X 


CO 00 P 

§ cs r- 

p50 
CO CO 

50 eo CO 


pOPPDJOOOp 

DiP»O5Ot4.C0t>*l'-.^ 

4}4r-,o>50oo^r--'^ 

od'4Xp-4‘*dcDO»dcd 

pcsot>-4j4eococot>- 

-405CSCO-4p04j4^ 


^ CO CO GO1^4 
oo’^cococo'^r^ 
00 00 CO 00 O 50 CO 

S ‘00 00 CD tX 444 oT 
_ ^ p CO 50 « ^ 


50 P 50 P 00 r- 


a 




© 

© 

9 

© 


© 

a 


. “5 


441 © 

o S3 


9 

9 

9 


© ^ 
b£ ^ 


9 

Ul 

© 


t-t 

9, 


9X3^ 

o 


p 

50 

00 

00 * 

05 


00 P CD O -o* 

r- iO p o P 

O -4 05 50 1-4 
50 cX CD-4 


00C^C^Pppl4.5OPPh*.C^p 

00i-4C050OC0PPC0OPDir- 

t-^t-pr-»op-4r»05oc^cop 

-4«XcXXcXcX cX cXcXod 


C^OOP Cl CD-4 po 50 »0 P CO 00 
^POO Tf4 p o O CO 1-400 »o 
Cl-4 CO -4 o COr-1-4-4 ^ d 


Cl go o Cl 4t4 CO-4 

Cl Cl ppco 

O O O 00 *0 1-4 t>* 


s 


O Tj* CO Cl 00 


Cl 

*o 


4J4 CO 1-4 Cl CO CO CO Cl CO ^ 00 


•=3 S 

2 

£ 

Oh 


© 

© 

t- 

2 

© 

9 

© 

o 


ta 



1 

1 

1 

2*- 

1 

© © 

1 

(M —4 

1 

Q 2 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 




© 

© 


4J4 

p 

CO 

•5 

r- 

p 

iO 


o S CO r- 00 

f-4 CO P »D O 


-4 >1^4 5^5 d 1414 4^4 •<^ 

P CD OO Tf* 50 50 P 
O 00 Cl d CO 00 00 


p d C- d CD 
' d CO “S* P P 
' CD 00 O !■- P 


p P 50 
-4 0 0 
CD 50 00 


4^'OClOp00i-450CD 

CD4f45O4^4dPPC000 

CD’^OOCOi-4dOOO 


eo -4 4t4 CO p p 50 
CO 50 P CO O 4-1 -4 
CO CD O Cl X* f-4 00 


d 4J4 
P 4J4 


-4 CO 4t* 
CO P Cl 
h- Cl r- CO 


Pb-5OCOi^00i-4C04j4,-<00Clt4» 

OOCOr'-b-drrtop^fOOPP 

P4J400P»OPP4J*004^44J4C'14»' 




1-4 d ^ 


CO -4 00 
O 4f4 CO 
4J* p p 

cX 50 


ppOe050Pdp-4 

OOOOOP500C15050 

4j4l-4ti-PPCOPt>-d 


4fp P P t- P p 
00 50 P -4 P o 
50 p p r- 00 CO -4 


p 

cc 


•4f< d -4 






d 

00 


p 

c- 

co 


d 




o Cl p d d 
t- CO 4}4 CO d 
d P 1-4 CO CO 

CD Xo »DP 
CO CO P Cl Cl 
-4 PCO P 


t4*r'-i'«-p-4f-pppd—ir- 
pTt<C0Pd00i-4PC0PO00 
t-COi-4pdPPOOOPOOOO 


d t>. 4f4 
OPP 
-4 CO 


CO o •■4 p 

S S o p 1^ 


-4 Tt* -4 p d 

O ^ pp 


C- 00 CO 


dcoodoocop 
d P 4J. CO P CO 
p 'k'co O 1^ P -H 


p p o t>. d p 

8 4J< f>- 00 4t4 p p 
00 ^ -4 p t- p 


CO t>. O 
P 1-4 00 
P 00 -4 


-4 P 

d o 

C- CO 


1-4 4t. CO pti-00 00 CO o 
Pt-« d P 4J4 4t4 d CO 

copp -Hp-4dcod—• 


p CO 1-4 ti- 1-4 


codco-^d-^eoi-4co 

CO 


4^ p 


CO -4 4J4 
-4 d «. 


dO-4f-1-4OPdC0 

• s* r* • 


^ ^ 4f4 P p 


s 


— © 
caSTJ © 


© «« 

© 

9 


o o 


^ 9.59 


r-- 

p 

50 

o 

CO 

cX 

CO 


«o 


4C4d0 4f<b- 

S o p 4f« 4J5 
CO CO CO P 

eX tX tjT 50 tX 

t- d P CO 4J4 
»-4 f- CO P t- 


-4OP00'^-4ti-P-4C000ii?'t^ 

dPPdot^ooo-4coco»ot'- 

■^i-4pC0t'-'^00'^C0OPPd 

4}r5d'cXppiXodco‘cd‘p»dcdod 

PPi-40OP00PCDCOpi-4t-t^ 

OOOp44pt-PPOO«bi-b-CO 


p CO 1-4 r- -4 


4f4dc0’^d'^coi-4C0444j.p^ 

CO •-^ 


-4 f- p 

P CO -4 
CO 4t< r-. 

tXc>ca 
00 1— t- 
-4 P P 

cdX id 

-4 d ^ 


dC0Pd*O4t5*-4dS 
^COX't'-piOP'^d 

50d-ppcd-diXpor 

Ppgpu^oopp 


00 d d h-p-4 *i»< ti-o -H p-4 d eo d p 


O P P P P CO O 

f-4 0Cippr>-i>* 

f-4 p r- p r- p 

O cfoo o CO rXp 

4»* Q P 4»? 4J- gj p 


d 


p 

p 

d 


1-4 O p ^ TP P P 


s 


9 

9 

© 

•ft 

© 

w 

© 

CQ^ 

X05 

9 © 

O u 

© 03 

> 9 

•—I © 

9X3 

a 9 

X3 

9. 

© 

fcM 

bd 

c 

© 

o 

t 


9 

5 

1-1 

o 

is 

w 

» 

z 


© 

•4^ 

o 



© < 

9^3 > O 

Oi^.C a 


9 

»4 

.o 


■V • 

® no 


© 

© 

9 

© 

9 

> 

o 

l4 

Oh 



a 

f4 

i 

» 

k) 

9 

9 

s 


2 

u 


® ' © 

59 ' s 

2 J© , 
o’SP^ g 

•5.3 
© 
© 


O]: & o«;S S 

OT ^ ^ 5 © « 2-2 99 ® 5^ 2-2 a'-J 

£>^^9 9 © ©;2 o ©XI n-go 

^<jw!2i:2;:2;tf S<j<JwoWhSeL, 

9 


2 
9 

® ©-i4 


© 

© '9 

Im 9 

.© © 


a 


^ ® 

©X »4 

9 0® 


© 
fl-a 

o ® 
9 
rt 


'z 


'z 


© 

P4 


109 


See footnotes at end of table. 














































































































































fl 

o 

U 

i 

Os 


0 

o 

u 

o 

Q 

pO 

k 

s 

ec 

S 

o 

k 

t® 

o 

k 

a. 

k 

0 

8 

"c 

k 

"§ 

S' 

k 

3 

00 

to 

C 

•i^ 

3 

k 

0 

3 

0 

O 

3 

2 

CO 

•M 

CO 

CO 

O 

O 

«w 

E 

•M 

k 

a. 

"0 

3 

0 


pC 

s 

a, 

k» 

3 

3 

O 

s 

I 


Xi 

e2 


rt W 
fl 

*■* ^ 


C^OC^cO 
00 cs t>. 

CO 


CO o> 

o 


COi-HOOOOCO <0»0 

o^i>»»o<o ooQ xo'^a 

tHkOOOUOCO 00^ OOCO 


c^ 


»o ^ 

*-H 




8 


c^ 

CO 


r-* CD 

c^ 


O CO OC 


C^ Oi O »0 
, CO ^ 

c^c0^t>- 
cT'^ooco oT 


8 


»0 CC 
»0 CO CO 

00 o o 


»D 00 

eo '«5j< 

00 ^ 


» C» CO *o c^ o 
o »D CO t'- 
t>- 05 CO CO 


s^' 


Di w 


.-H CO 


CD O CD C^ 

o CD C^ 1-H 

c5 


»c o 

00 CO 


00 to 


OJ CO lO O 
C^ Tf Q C5 
CD lO Cl 

^ 

CO CO CD CO 
CD ^ 


00 ^ 

g -^f« ID 00 

05 00^ 

V" CD* Ol* 
kO C5 


o 

c 

C3 

>4^ 

CO 

Vi 

Vi 

03 

o 

a 

a 


CO 

05 

a 


03 

• M 

o 

C5 

a 

CD 


d to the 
blind 

bp.OCDiD 
d ID O -H 

ID 1-t ^ 05 

d bp. 
05 CO 
OOtPF 

Pi* ID Pi* 051-4 
F-1 00 Pt* O 00 
O Pt* 05 Pi* Cl 

^ d 
Pi* CD 
^ 05 

COOO d 
—H ID 
d Pi* 00 

O CO CO bp. o 
CD ID 00 00 bpi 

bpF F^ ^ ID 00 

bpi ^ bp 
O 1—* 05 
CD O Cl 

CD 05 d 
d 1-H fH 
^ iD ^ 

Pi* oc’cD CO 
COOO»D 

ooo 

pt* Pi* 
00 

ftk «* m 

tpF ID F-4 o O 
^ b— 1-H d 

ID* CO 
Pi* fH 

ID i-TcD 
^ rH ^ 

CO ID CD CO cT 
ID 1-H 



icTc^pi^ 

CO;:Hd 

d 


OC^Ot^CliDOO’^ 
wClOOiCDCO’^OCD 
05 ^ 00 ^ Cl c* ^ 

«-H««ij?'^cDcooorr>rci’ 

ClClCDOOcDcOi-i'^fiCO 


d Cl o 

tN. Cl CO ID 
CO CO »D 

cDcfirToo 

f—t •—I 05 


C«05 

00 CD 

^ P*1 

oTof 


■PJ* 

ID 

CD 


-4^ 

^ fl 
O fl? o 

>- 

'O 

^ 05^3 

<1 

©05 

*0 


COOQ^- 
r-H t>- ^ ID 
CO O CO ID 

CO CD ID tC 
Q Cl Tt4 
d i-4CO^ 




05 

CO 

05 

b- 

ID 

d 

CO 

b- 

d 

Pt* 

00 


Pt* 

b- 

00 

05 

d 

^4 

ID 

IP- 

b- 

ID 

ID 

f-H 

Pi* 

CD 

05 

b- 

CO 

05 

Pt* 

CD 

CD 

CO 

CO 

00 

b- 

bp- 

05 

lO 

bp. 

d 

00 

ID 

00 

CO 

05 

^4 

bp. 


ID 

o 

ID 

05 

b- 

w 

-t* 

b- 

Op 

Pt* 

Pi* 

00 

CD 

CO 

CD 

ID 

CO 

CO 

00 

CO 

CO 

ID 

o 

CO 

CO 

05 

CO 

tp- 

CO 

CD 

o 

05 

CD 

d 

05 

d 

Pi* 

Pi* 

b- 

d 

o 

CO 

o 

d 

d 

CO 

d 

CD 

O 

1-H 

CD 

00 


bp- 

05 

I-H 

ID 

ID 

d* 


bpT 

•» 

b- 

O 

eo 

00* 

CO 

*k 

CD 

CD 

•> 


Pl^ 

00* 

•I 

05 

■pT 

CD 

CO 

«k 

b- 

»D 

ID 

ID 

•k 

«k 

05 

#« 

CD 

05 

o 

CO 

b- 

CO 

d* 

•» 

b- 


•» 

b- 

•k 

05 

•k 

CO 

Pi* 

d 

o 


CO 

OO 



Pi* 

O 

05 

Pt* 

ID 

CO 

o 

5R 

ID 

05 

CO 

oc 

bp- 

CD 

O 

ID 

CO 

PI* 

CO 

Pt* 

00 

tp- 

5G 

bPF 

b- 

00 

1-H 

00 

05 


d 

d 

bp- 

i-H 

fH 





»-H 

O 

d 

Pi* 

d 


d 

pf» 



CO 

CO 

Cl 



I-H 

d 

F-* 


d 

f-H 






o ^ 05 ^ 
t-H CD O 
CO CD CD 
^ * 
ID ID O d 

S”2S 


o 

© © 
to 3 

d b- 05 Pt* 

Pi* d 

05 bp» Pi* pt* CO 

dcD 

ID 05 CD 

CD ID Pi* 00 bp 

bp 05 d 

O CO d 

Obpi-HOOPl*lDbp*-lCO 

d b- 1—1 f-H 

00 05 ID Pt* 

O Pi* 

CD ID CD 05 F-I 

d CD 

CO 1-* Pi* 

d o 005 00 

CO CD b- d Pi* 

I-H CD 05 


00500c005e0o00c0 

bp Pi* 

CD »-* OObp 

00 d o d 

05 bp 

pf* 00 CO CD b- 

d 00 

d I*H ID 

PT bp d 

4Ci-hiOp1*COCOp1*i-*ID 

3 08 

CD CO CO CD 

CO Pt* CD CD 

00 Pi* 

1—1 CO ID 05 05 

ss 

o bp. 00 

d ID I-H 05 ID 

bp^co fp^ 

b-i ID d 

COC>OiDcdo6l'pC5b^ 
o:opi*oopi«>— idcoci 

00 ID ID 1-T 

JL 

gf; 

CO 05 I-H CD CD 

O bp CO 

1-H CO ID tp. ID 

ID CD 00 
d d d 

CO O CO 
CD d 00 

d op ID CQ 
d ^ 00 d 

2a 

O ID CD b- 

d d »-« d CO 

05 CO 

d FH CO 

1-H CD fH ID CO 

00O5i-HCObpdCDC0CD 

o ^ 

03 


o 




•k Vk 

CO F-* 

•k *k «k 

»“< CO t-H 

«> *k 

I-H d 

of Cl i-T i-T I-H 

•k 


f-4 05 00 
O 05 ^ 00 
OO’Pt’CDC^ 



d bP ID CD 
d 1-H d -H 
bp ID 00 bp 

ID ID 
bp ID 
00 00 

d05eOiDb- 
ooo5oodbp 
00 d CD 00 CO 

o o 

d FH 

O 05 

ID ID 05 

?§?ss 

O »D 00 Pi* 05 
CD bp- PI* 05 o 
o 05 CO d 1 -H 

ID OO CD 
1 -H 40 O 
CO Pi* 05 

CO b- 05 

ID S' bp 
pf OQO 

C5 

•4H 

o 

CLt 

•k «k «k •» 

Pt* O Pt* o 

bp 00 00 bp 

COb-OCO 

-H pf 
05 Pi* 
CD -1* 

ID bH bTcO 00 
O d I-H O CO 
ID ID 05 11* ID 

O Pi* 

do CO 
00 00 05 
CO d Pt* 

i-T 00 bpT bsT ID 
d b» bp CD 1-H 
d 00 ID 00 ID 

«k ^ •k 

hH i-H bp 
bp pf 05 
ID bp pf 

•k Ik 

b- bp b- 
pf 00 00 
00 bp ^ 


^ ^ Vk 

^ I-H »H 

rH 

•i 

fH 

«k 


Vk «k 

rH 

^ *k Ik 

1 -H CO I-H 

»-H d I-H 


»-4COC-’^COCOCDiDCO 
iDCCdO05C000ClcD 
lN.iD»-'t'«CDdOOt^ 

l'-CD‘DO»DCOdCOCO 
^OCCCDO’^t^CDOO 

^ »-H d i-H ^ d CO Cl ^ 


O CD 05 
O CO ID 
O CD 05 O 

tCrjTo 

CO 

CD O 
CO 


op 05 t-d 
Cl ^ O 
d CO CO 

cf’^iD'iD' 

g eo !-• « 

^ CO V 


Vi 

•a 

o 

s 


X5 

3 

Oh 


a 

u 

C5 

'S W 

*3 O 

O *-• 

§04 

Vi^4 

biD 

a ® 

e" 

03 


<X>^ 
2-^2 


o 

u 

04 




05 d -O' d 
O ID 05 CO 
lO CD CD 05 


05 CO 
d 


rt< 


CD 4-4 
05 d 
05 CD 

CO ^ 


ooooo 
o o o o o 
ooooo 

cCoror^'d* 

>D O b- d 05 
Tf4 ID O "PJ* 05 

CO cToco^eo 



«-H 


o o o 
o o o 
o o o 

tCiDTf? 
t>. t- 
^ ^ *D 

^ •p 

CO ^ *-4 


ogoog 

S o o o o 

iD‘t>r«-H‘^ cT 
ID O o 00 
CD d 4-c 05 

tC ID c^-i^r ,H 

P»4 


OQO 

o o o 
o o o 

tCTt-^cD* 
CD -H CD 
O O ID 

CD Cl InT 


dpo 

CD d t>. 
OCDt>. 


oopoopoo oopo 
opoppoop opoo 
oooooooo oooo 

^CO'PJ4'ID CO cfcf nTCD iD'oo'oood 

ID d d 05-H d ID fh wcoopiD 
C* 00 00 CO 00 c*’PJ'ID Pt< C0*-iOCD 

d*^o cTtCiD ,-r>^cD cid’oTi-r 


o o o 


05 CO o 

CO CO ID CO 
Cl ID ID CD 
— ^ » 
CD p-« CD 


>o 

> u< 2 

—N O 3v 


® bo 

o 

u 

Oh 


© 

'© 

e 

o 

3 

© 

o 


0-2 


© o 

l-> 

rs © 


c8 

•4— 

o 

6h 


t-4 00 CO 

C- CD ID 
f-4 05 Pi* 05 

CfoiD 
ID ID 

CD O 05 CD 

Pi*" i-T r-T co" 


CO d 

g?5 

f-ioo 

d c- 

CO CD 

CO 

CO 


dO5diD00 ID'Pi* iDCDOO 

•Pt*CD00O5*^ P»D 05 ID CO 

t-O4-H*DCi0 05tp. Pl*dd 

coooro5p oTcf piDO 

•-••Pt^ptipd OO OiDl>- 

Pi* d CD O d CO »-4 


tp- o 
■Tj* CO CO 
d 00 1-4 

Ik - 

^ Cl S 6 d 

t-4 p lp» PJ* ■Pf* 
ID 1-H 1-H 


Pj* fp- Pi* 
00 ID 
f-H d P 

CsTiD pj*" 
05 Pt* •-< 
ID d 00 


tp. 00 c- 

CO 05 i-« 

00 ot^ 

oTpiI’-^ 
O *-p 00 
00 c- 


iDd»DlDC005iD05CD 

piiO^iD00O00CD05 

Cl05005CDCOOC005 


05 ID d o d d 
•-< CD tp- Pi* d d 
oooodd 


CD ID 
- . - . fH 00 
CO CO f-H Cp 


ID •“* d eo 

Pt* C* CD 

ocot^o 

•l Ip •S 

*-4 ID CD o 
ID 05 CO tp" 
Pi* d OOpI* 


00 05 fp- CO 
CO 05 1-^ CO 
CO P»* 00 Cl 

cfd'g'piT 


00 


■^co 


1-4IDC1 3 «-4 


CO CD rH t-i C4 


03 

© 

Eh 


CO 00 CO 05 
05 IP- O CD 
00 Pl< CO CD 

•k ^ ^ 

ID CO 
CO 00 
00 PI* 

00 ID plToT 


tp* 

CO 


§ 

00 


05 ^ 
O Pt* 

ot^ 


Pi* 00 ID O ID 
d CD CD d d 
CD CO 00 Pi* d 

c^c^if^^F-T 
bp. CO Pi? 05 ID 
CO CO CD tp» 


8 


Cl ^ CO CO Pi* 


ID Pi* 
d CD 
05 CD 

O PT 
CO 

CD CD 
CD Cl 


O ^ C« 

00 05 tp- 
00 ''I* 00 

05*0"0 

^* 

05 CD ID 


ID ID d -H 05 
CO tp- 05 CO CO 
rp PI* ID 1-4 Cl 

CD CO" CT CO tpT 

CO ^ 1—( b- 


05 


Pi* 05 


05 ID 
05 C- 
Pi* CD ID 

•k 

O Q 00 
CO Ob'- 
Cl o 00 


CO 


d 


05 00 00CDd 
CD 


05 


d 


05i:-d 

d Pi* 

bp. i-H O 

2g“ 


CDlDd05C0di-HP1*05 

05CD'^iDbp.P»*bp.05iD 

O5P1*i-iCDC0*Di-4COb'- 

pboTi-Ttpr.-ropi^cior 

■^^IDCOOSOOOOCOCO 

bp-bp-bpdi—<Pi*iDcoo 


Pi* CO CO 05 
^ *-< ID 


X d 00 00 


ID 00 00 d 
pf* O ^ 05 

O ID bp» o 

S *od ID cT 
^ 05Q 
1-4 ^ ID o 

CO CO* tt Cl 
d 


CO00p 1«0O 
Ob-eo w 
o bp> ^ ID 

d*iD CO ^ 
O QO bp. Cl 
CPOC105 

•« ». •k 

cD«-PCiao 


^ 


ID 00 ID d 
CD »D d PI* 
d CD b- d 

CD 00 ID ID 
d 05 d CD 
F-4 ^ b- 05 

oTiD-^05 


hH CD 

b* I-H 

ID pf 

bp 05 CO 00 OQ 
d bp pf bp 00 
bp 00 bp05 ID 

^05 
CO pf 
bp CO 

pf 00 CO 
CO CO bP 
05 pf ID 

bp O fH I-H pj* 

CD ^ I-H o 00 
CO tP d CO 05 

pf »*H ^ 
ID I-H 05 
CO tP FH 

ID 05 pf 
d 00 d 
F-* ID tP 

iDbpiDpf00di-HO5O5 
C00 0500c0i-Hbpbp00 
bpC0dO5bPCOi-HiD00 

tp w ffO d 
CD ID d 00 
CD d d CO 

O CO 
CO bp 
hH bp 

CO d"CD—To 

00 CD pf o O 
coeobpiDbp 

^ Ik 

pf bp 
111 d 
CD CD 

1-H*CD d 
d I-H ID 
05 CD ID 

•k •k ^ ^ 

00 bP ^ 05 CD 
ID 00 CD 1—1 00 
hH Cl ID Pi* 05 

oTci o 

00 d ID 
d »H 05 

ocoTo 

00 pf I-H 

CDi-Hbpb^bpCOPfOpf 

bPiDiD05f-H0500pfPf 

bpbPOSCDdpfiDCOO 

C^CnTci ID* 
00 d CD 1-H 
1-H hH bp CO 

1-H d" 

d 

hH 

*1* CO CO Pi*" pf 

CD Cl 

CO I-H ci 

•k Ik «k 

O 00 00 CD d 
tP 

05 fh hh 
d 1-H 

OCD 00 
1-* d 

pfCDCDoTpHodClOOod 

1-H t-H ID ^ FH 

CO CO b-Tci 
Cl 


Pi* ID OO d 
ID d 00 d 
CO C- 05 00 

§ SS"d 

$ CD CO 

^ «k _ » •> 

CD •H Cl 05 


*o 

0 

C0 

© 

5- 
® S 

§2 
•—< rt 

CO ti 
•fp Co 

*-p li^ 

a 

© 

,3 

P. 


s 

o 

© 

O 


*3 

© 

3 

.a 

3 

o 

Q 


i -9 


H 

2 

*< 

H 

» 

t-i 

0 

0 


'3 

© 

3 
3 

m4 

3 

O 

O 

TO bO 

•— r— 

^ 9 


bfl 


S 

P« 




t 

CO 

© 


0 

H 

2 

» 

O 

W 

H 

0 

O 

Z 


3 m 

cd^ 


,£ co'3 

sP-iWoqI> 

3 

© 


© 

to 

S.S.. 

;;;*a »p 05 

.S9;f3 0.0 

oOgQ C3 

.3 S 

a a 



0 

2 , 
« 


(r 

2 

< 


{H 

2 




O ® 'S S O fcjD ® S? a CO w c3 ® 

c§|l|||§|§=3^| 


n 


o 

CQ 


m 

H 

P 

O 

OQ 


I 
4 

3 
O 

4.» 

bc 

3 

fO 

3^ 

Sa 

pS 


a 

3 


i il„ 

fP 

bo i^n 

« as £ ° 


110 








































































































































CO CO ^ 
CO ^ 
CO o> t^ 


^ ^ ^0 
00 001>- 
Tf o 


W^ ci CD 

»-< »o »o 


OJ» *-1 


to 

o 


C» 00 CO »o o> 
05 DJ CD CO 
CO c^ 

eo^csTc^ 

CD 00 


^ »0 CO 


CO 

*-^ *^ 00 
co'cTio 


CO 05 CO 00 
OOCMt^OC- 
^ <D CO C^l CD 

*0 CO ^ 


O CD 

§s 

o 


lOO 

IS 

loi^ 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 


i-t00'^DJ»^»O05O 

»0C^D^'^05'^«-HC£> 

0-^0«DC^CDC^»0 

- ^ ^ ^ _•. _•*• VV ^ 

05C<I00505COOOO 


CO 
CO 


I CO ® 

DJ 1-1 


s 

•k 

t>. 


CO ^ 00 
00 i-H 05 
05 D) ^ 

O'cD i-T 

C< 1-t w 


CO CD 00 

S I-* 55 

»0 CO 


wo O CD CO 
05 r* i-< lo 001^ 
00 DJ 00 CO CD 


O C-co 
O 1^ 
05 CO 


D< 

eo 


O CO »0 1-N 1—t ts. 

^ ^ ^ CO 


05 CO CO 


1-H 0 1-H 00 

0 CD CO Tt4 
t- 05 CD 

go CD -H 
W5 ko 

0 »o 

kO t- 05 05 CO 05 

0 CO CD -14 ^ i>. 

b- 0 i-H kC CO CO 

t- 005 
C^ 05 CO 
CD GO CD 

1111 
CO 4 1 1 1 
^ 1 1 1 1 
^ 1 1 1 t 

0 t- 00 00 
t- 00 00 

05 05 CO CD 

0005C5i-400»0’^ 

i-4-14050CDOkO’Tj4 

O5CDCO^00»Ot--t^ 

1-1 

05 rj4 
kO C^ 

© 

CO 

CO’ 1-4 05 C4 
kD 00 Q 05 

cd 00 cd 

CD 05 -14 

t- r- 

#4 

05 CO -1* 1-4 kO i14' 

kO *D 00 »0 i-H kC 

1-4 CO 0 

00 1*14 05 

l-H 1—4 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 ( 

^ 1 1 1 1 

1 1 t 1 

kill 
11(4 

1 • 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

1 1 t 1 

cdi-4'‘cd<© 

1-4 CD 

C^icDcocD-^C^Oi-d 

cDi-H05CqO'^00CM 

OOkOi-HC'lkO-iinHCO 

*4 

05 Cl 
wo kC 

© 

0 

CO 

© 

Xi 

>> 

i-H CO 1-1 CO 
<» t- 05 0 
*0 0 CD 00 

W^OOi-H 
t-- 05 t-. 
1-4 CO 05 

CO 1-1 00 CD rt4 CO 
^ 111* H}’ CD C5 1—4 
0 05 CD !>• 00 CO 

kC kC 0 
Q r- *D 
« 00 05 

CD -1* CO C<l CO 
1-4 CO 1414 CO 

CO 0 kO c-. CO 

0 1-4 

1-4 GO 05 05 

CO 05 i-H HT 

05kOtN.c,5C,.^ kOoO 
•VC-COC^i-hOS-h*^ 
i-iC^CDC5CCOCOO 

CO 
i-H CD 

^ 0 

Xi 

73 ‘ 

2 0 

*4 «4 *4 

»0 CO CO 00 

Q »o 1- as 

»0 ^ CO Dl 

CD ©Ti-d 
pH CO 
*D 1-i 05 

«k 

cd cd rd 1-d CO* kO 

CO 00 CO CO ^ 
i-H l-H l-H l-H GO 4"^ 

cd05 05 
05 -14 CO 

1-4 rj4 

^ ^ ^ 
05 kO ,—1 00 
'S* CO t— Hj* CO 

0 1 -^ t-- 00 t- 

•4 

-g-N-rf 

tdwdcdcDort-r-irwd 

t-CMTlKNcDr-kDOO 

05CDi-HC0C0-1*t-*HH 

«> «» 

1-4 00 

05 05 

t^o 

0 < eo 

•h . fl 


t'- 1-1 CO 
05 Q 

t^CDOO 

^ 

1-4 ^ 00 


S rH CO »0 CO 0& 1-^ CD DJ DJ 
1^005000 Cll>* 
00 CO Dl » CD f-l CO *Ot'« 

f ’‘coCDr-r05'‘oo'‘t^CO *ct'^ 

•D 00 OCO *0 1-4 oco 
C< 1-1 •—I 


t^C^^C^COCO^»^ <Ni-^ 


»0 O 40 *-1 
00 »0 O 00 
kO lO CD eo 


£p<=> 

05 t>- lO 

CD 05 CO 

CD 

1^ 

CO c<i t>. 

»> ffk 

^ CO 


CO 00 CO 

•-H -14 CO 

kO oo o 


05 O 

kc eo 


kD o’ 

g05O5 00 Q 


D4 


o 


C<l »D 
t'- t^O 

ooo 
»D t^TcO 

00 CO 05 
CO t- 


05 CO CO 
CO 00 

o kC CO 

i-T wo'—T o<r c4“ 

8 CO CO 

1-^ t— 00 


t'- O C<l 
C-. O 00 CO 
O CD *0 

kcT’^-kO CD 
CO 05 


05 CD 05 b-00 1—( 00 05 05 
1-H 00 t-00 05 CS C^C- 
00 t>* CO CO DJ CS i-( 1-H o 

O ^OO'^^odc^cT CDOO 
00 05 (N wo kC 05 WOOD 

TT COCD ^ 05 05 »D COCO 


F"4CO^C^'^CO^i^ 


CO 



O 05 


O CD 


«0 ko CO C- 05 
O »-H O 05 »o 
CO r- 05 CD CD 


ooo 

8 SS 

oo^t^od 
wo CO r^ 

CO OM5 


CO 1-4 CD CO W 


^ ^ *-4 ^ 


05 O CO 05 05 
"<1* CO CO CO 
cDf^ r- -n* CO 

of D^C<»CS 


b- 00 CO CD 
CO kO ^ 

CO CO •-« 

fM c<f 


■rfk 1 -t 00 koTt 4 00 eot>. 

kOOOcDC<lC0005f-* CDkO 
05 CO Dl o OC O 05 00 t^CD 


’^Ol-H'^COl^'4j4C< 

M 1-H M 


00 


CO 00 CD t— 
t- S CO Tf4 
-I* CO »c r- 

1-4 QOO 
0 00 05 
CO 1 -H wo 

•<1* GO kO r>. 1-H GO 
00 t- »0 CO 0 CO 
r- t— 1—4 1—' kO CD 

CO 0 t- 
CO 05 00 
COCDTJ4 

CD 0 l-H 00 

kO t- -14 PH 
CO -14 05 00 

t 

1 

1 

0 l-H 0 
0 CO pH CO 
Hf CD <J0 0 

ododtded 

oo^odecT 

CO I- CD 
kO l-H 

tdcdo'cD*odld‘ 
CO CD kO 0 CO 

l-H 

k<dcd“w 
40 Dl CO 

cdi-TcTcd' 

kO 05 

c5 1-4 CO 

i 

1 

1 

1 

•4 «W •» 

CD 0 CO CO 
kD Ht* CO CO 
CO pH 


cd 




t 

1 



i-J-^CSi-ikCO^-OS 

t^C0t'-'«a'^-i-H05CD 

00.-Ht-.CO*«t’i-4ThO 

cd’^cdi-^cDcdi-^kc 

COOCDcD’^t^kOt>- 

051-HCD’^D^^•C0•-C4 


O 05 
CO 

o ^ 

CO 
05 CD 


CD CO 




00 <N CD GO 
CO O 05 
CD 00 1—* 

*4 

S TjkCDO 
CD Tf< kO 
O5CD00O 

co^’i-TtC''^'^ 


b-OOO 
05 kO 'kj’ 
05 1-H 05 

W4 » *4 

*-« kO ^ 
CO 05 O 
05 CO GO 


r- CD 00 ko c- 
■ 00 O 05 05 

CO 1-4 CO 0 05 


s 




05 


kO t- 1-H kcp O CO 
lO OO 1—I t- 00 O 
kC 05 O rH 00 O 

^ rH ?-H I—4 


OO D? 

S CO 05 

C- -414 

•• #4 •« 

CO rH 
05 051-4 

f-H 


W> Tfi ^ O CO 
00 O GO 00 
kO -14 iO CO 

cd c^ Tf'1—r 1—r 

CP CD 05 —• D» 
05 00 CD CD 1-4 


i-H (?a CO CO CO CO 


t- *-< 05 

t- eo 05 05 

CO CN 

odco D?‘o 

<35 CO 05 CO 

OOCDCO’4J4 

•-H c<r 


O O 1-4 00 05 GO 00 r-' 05 CO 

05 ca »0 00 kO O CD 05 kO 

CO 05 1-4 CD t-CD r-< Di iO 

odo O-14^O 1-^05 -^CD 
<35 CO kO ^ kort 4 o CDt- 

CO 00 CO 1-H t--CO 00 O CD 


COCDCOOOC^OOW’^ 
CD »“< Ol 


^ CD 


-H 00 0 DJ 

CD 1-4 

•'1' 05 t— 05 

00 05 0 
!>. CO 1-4 
^ CD 0 

r- kD CO CO t- CD 
05 r- 00 ^ »o CO 
0 CD ^ 

tH. kO 

eo cs 0 
0 05 CO 

GO CO pH CO pH 
CD CO CD 114 CD 

cs PH 00 r- 0 

t- t- 05 0 

05 CD 05 05 

00 eo ko 

pHcokOoocoe-i-- 

HjiTt4b»cOkOkOOOkO 

t-copHcooo»t-- 

CO 00 

cs cs 

r-H ko 

pdc^P-Tco' 

pH Q 

05 ^ pH 

tdoT cd 

^ 05 iH 

OCOO 

wdkdi-Ttdod^ 

kO 05 pH CO CD ^ 
wo 05 0 cs 05 05 

kdcD rd 
0-14 cs 
00 00^ 

CD pH* od cd cd 

-H t- 05 -14 <0 

0 OOCD CD 4-H 

cd’kdcdcT 

0 0 05 CO 

05 1- CO 11* 

rdedcd^ii4*-dorc5 
c0CSt--kOt—h-CDCO 
r-05C0pHHiitN,p005 

cdcD* 
CO 1 — 
pH CD 

CO pH ^ 

cd 0 

wm^ 

*4 *1. ^ 

pH f-H 1 -H cs l-H 

pdedcs 

ededed 

»• •> 

PH cs 

cdcDcdodcdodod'^ 
CD 1-4 cs 

id CO* 

i-H 


<D 

> 

a 


s 

> 
ca.£5 
■4^ 3 

s § 


V 

B 




s - 

<v c« 
. w 

jZM B 

o 

-s-iB 

o g5 

B 


B 

o 

-w 

CO 

05 

'C 

cs 

xi 

u 

03 

B 


i;o § ia'S S ^ S § ®.9 

^£<400^' 

c s 9 g rt g 

S;l 


* I I 

r/i 9 

—4 

t. Q '"B rB 
y 2 > ft > 

c 3 S X axi 

Bn w o M'S? 

O ^ w “ - 


Im -_. 

o a p 
^ 0)05© 

(*i OUIh5 


^ss 

OcQ&^ 


^ 

a o5 


o 

o § 0-2 

• ^ fc- B © 


1 

0 

1 

1 

b 

1 

1 

© 

r 


B 

0 

Ph 

tr 

Q 

B 



73 

9 

S'^ 

a ° 


M 

;BP-ci^ B a co'C'g § 

••c3«o0S*B0.S;0 

a Q W Ph CQ Ph 

X ^ 

0) ^ 

6 h > 


B 

3 

w 

• • 

cs 

c 

bfi 

> 


w 

o» 

o> 


Q i-i ^ o 
X © 73 

OT > B ® 
^ p o3 ra 

Sa 


“'0§“Sqg’-'a la 
a5gi5|i:-pS-3 2:2a 


B 

o 


Vj 

o 


'S O'B yCQ fl-g § 
X^a3«3c32o’*‘3^5 

I-IOCQOTOQ g st^'^CQC-' 


C9 

o 


. . © 03 a 

oo&^ 


0) 

»« 

£ 

0> 

u 

o 

X3 


a 




g 

' *::? o 2 O o 

'2— CO 

1 5 p a ® 

, S.&o.£f2 

O •- M ^ 
^ 
o 


Ih rt 

s § 

»B 

O ^ 

>*73 
u a> 

-M O 

‘C B 

© o 
' o 


o 

B 

o 

• p4 
•4^ 

eo 

Ui 

o 

P4 

o 

o 


ii«B 

oSa| 

-ti W eSS 

03 © tia o 

£S|.S 

•g«^a 

:a««l 

w ij 

?? Wj-- s 

2 fl o3 iB 
^.B ^ -4^ 

Bip « B 
.S^B'Btp 

s 

a ^ 

•B ® 

csiS-Bti 

05^3 •*^ B 

§2«« a 
03 o O a 

bEh 45 a 
cO B*p 

'B O E 

»-• *pi I-I B* 

05 


'B 

o 

o 

B 

© 

V) 

'i 

B 

o 

73 

© 

© 


^ 1::^ 

O O B -M 

S H 3.2 .a 

©eo fc- B 

— 2 ti£ 4> iB 


©eo -- 
— 9 ti 4> 
P O =r+j 

^ .B co 
'B 

is ^ c> O 


a 

73 

03 


2'B 
o P>> 
*0*2 

a 2 

® w 
TP B 
© o 

>*2 

s © 

ft 04 

6*3 

© 

rt ^ 

0.9 

”9 

°a 

Vi 

OA © 

•p 

il 

B^ 

« o 

« a 

ft©^ 
© *3^ 
»-4 ®aH 
• p eo b:* 

B © 

CO be 

•-riepis 


eS 

CQ 


2 i 

03 ^ 
© ^■' 
eO.Saj 2 
©•4^ 


B-< _ 

® 6 § B 


'T? . © 

-B ft eo 

03.2 TS PH — 


cd ^ 

OS'S 

B © -Ji 
.2 g 2 
<0 2 © 
>B O. 

»pH O 

Q.a © 

■•9 § 

X3 


^ os.stj fl © 
feaa2.2> Q.a 

2*3 §4.2 S 2 

H £ S gip . ^-S-B 

S®S>s^*SiS 

©£5fe^O>»0flCC?>^03 

>4^73 ©f^-B 

5^2 ©_S pji 


111 











































































































Table C—12 .—Percentage distribution of amount of public and private assistance and earnings under specified 

Federal work programs, by urban area, 1929 


Geographic division, State, 
and urban area i 


Total_ 

New England 
Connecticut: 

Bridgeport_ 

Hartford_ 

New Britain_ 

New Haven_ 

Maine: Portland..,.. 

Massachusetts: 

Boston_ 

Brockton___ 

Cambridge_ 

Fall River___ 

Lawrence_ 

Lowell_ 

Lynn___ 

Malden_ 

New Bedford_ 

Newton_ 

Springfield_ 

Worcester_ 

Rhode Island: Providence_ 

Middle Atlantic 
New Jersey: 

Jersey City_ 

Newark__ 

Trenton_ 

New York: 

Albany_ 

Buffalo_ 

New Rochelle_ 

New York_ 

Niagara Falls_ 

Rochester_ 

Syracuse_ 

Utica_ 

Yonkers_ 

Pennsylvania: 

Allentown_ 

Altoona_ 

Bethlehem_ 

Chester_ 

Erie__ 

Johnstown_ 

Philadelphia_ 

Pittsburgh_ 

Reading_ 

Scranton_ 

Wilkes-Barre_ 

North Central 
Illinois: 

Chicago_ 

Springfield_ 

Indiana: 

Evansville_ 

Fort Wayne_ 

Indianapolis_ 

South Bend_ 

Terre Haute_ 

Iowa: 

Des Moines_ 

Sioux City_ 

Kansas: 

Kansas City_ 

Topeka_ 

Wichita_ 

Michigan: 

Detroit- 

Flint_ 

Grand Rapids.. 

Pontiac_ 

Saginaw_ 

Minnesota: 

Duluth_ 

Minneapolis_ 

St. Paul_ 


Total 
public 
and 
private 
funds 2 

Public funds 

Private 
funds • 

Total 

General relief ^ 

Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 

Special types of public assistance 

Total 

Direct 

relief 

Work 

relief 

Civil 
Works 
Pro¬ 
gram * 

Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA 5 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

children 

Aid to 
the 
blind 

100.0 

75.8 

34.8 

34.7 

0.1 



41.0 

0) 

37.7 

3.3 

24.2 



100.0 

77.5 

53.4 

53.4 




24.1 


23.6 

.5 

22.5 

100.0 

41.0 

26.6 

26.6 




14.4 


13.7 

.7 

59.0 

100.0 

92.8 

53.3 

53.3 




39.5 


39.4 

.1 

7.2 

100.0 

65.8 

24.5 

24.5 




. 41.3 


40.1 

1.2 

34.2 

100.0 

83.0 

66.5 

66.5 




16.5 


11.1 

5.4 

17.0 

100.0 

83.5 

60.5 

60.5 




23.0 


21.7 

1.3 

16.5 

100.0 

78.1 

65.7 

65.7 




12.4 


10.9 

1.6 

21.9 

100.0 

91.2 

66.8 

66.8 




24.4 


22.4 

2.0 

8.8 

100.0 

99.3 

91.3 

91.3 




8.0 


6.7 

1.3 

.7 

100.0 

93.6 

73.8 

73.8 




19.8 


19.2 

.6 

6.4 

100.0 

88.9 

63.5 

63.5 




25.4 


24.2 

1.2 

11.1 

100.0 

82.2 

,63.8 

63.8 




18.4 


17.6 

.8 

17.8 

100.0 

98.9 

'90.1 

90.1 




8.8 


7.3 

1 5 

1.1 

100.0 

96.0 

88.2 

88.2 




7.8 


6.8 

1.0 

4.0 

100.0 

87.2 

47.8 

47.8 




39.4 


38.4 

1.0 

12.8 

100.0 

77.7 

63.3 

63.3 




14.4 


13.5 

.9 

22.3 

100.0 

90.8 

76.8 

76.8 




14.0 


12.7 

1. 3 

9.2 

100.0 

72.7 

29.3 

29.3 




43.4 


43.4 


27.3 

100.0 

96.0 

25.9 

25.9 




70.1 


69.2 

.9 

4.0 

100.0 

83.7 

45.9 

45.9 




37.8 


37.0 

.8 

16.3 

100.0 

96.5 

41.5 

41.5 




55.0 


62.8 

9.. 9. 

3.6 

100.0 

58.9 

29.8 

29.8 




29.1 


26.2 

2.9 

41.1 

100.0 

84.6 

62.6 

62.6 




22.0 


21.1 

.9 

15.4 

100.0 

83.2 

46.5 

46.5 




36.7 


32.8 

3.9 

16.8 

100.0 

77.9 

8.5 

8.5 




69.4 


67.4 

2.0 

22.1 

100.0 

77.2 

42.0 

42.0 




35.2 


34.2 

1.0 

22.8 

100.0 

80.7 

70.8 

70.8 




9.9 


8.9 

1.0 

19.3 

100.0 

80.6 

56.6 

56.6 




24.0 


22.6 

1.4 

19.4 

100.0 

72.4 

36.0 

36.0 




36.4 


33.9 

2.5 

27.6 

100.0 

82.3 

24.5 

24.5 




57.8 


66.5 

1.3 

17.7 

100.0 

79.9 

10.5 

10.5 




69.4 


69.4 


20.1 

100.0 

81.3 

36.6 

36.6 




44.7 


44.7 


18.7 

100.0 

83.8 

47.9 

47.9 




35.9 


35.9 


16.2 

100.0 

80.4 

30.6 

30.6 




49.8 


49.8 


19.6 

100.0 

74.7 

30.9 

30.9 




43.8 


43.8 


25.3 

100.0 

97.6 

65.6 

65.6 




32.0 


32.0 


2.4 

100.0 

43.5 

4.8 

4.8 




38.7 


38. 7 


66.5 

100.0 

71.2 

19.9 

19.9 




51.3 


61.3 


28.8 

100.0 

72.3 

19.8 

19.8 




62.6 


52.5 


27.7 

100.0 

78.0 

47.4 

47.4 




30.6 


30.6 


22.0 

100.0 

96.2 

73.4 

73.4 




22.8 


22.8 


3.8 

100.0 

65.3 

16.6 

16.6 




48.7 


37.4 

11.3 

34.7 

100.0 

86.9 

26.7 

26.7 




60.2 


19.6 

40.6 

13.1 

100.0 

95.1 

88.5 

88.6 




6.6 


6.6 


4.9 

100.0 

55.8 

43.2 

43.2 




12.6 


12. 6 


44.2 

100.0 

53.4 

46.9 

46.9 




6.5 


6.5 


46.6 

100.0 

79.0 

53.6 

63.6 




25.4 


25.4 


21.0 

100.0 

90.7 

80.5 

80.5 




10.2 


10.2 


9. 3 

100.0 

72.2 

30.8 

30.8 




41.4 


28.8 

12. fi 

27.8 

100.0 

69.9 

24.5 

24.6 




46.4 


35. 6 

9.9 

an. 1 

100.0 

64.6 

63.3 

63.3 




1.3 


1. 3 

36.4 

100.0 

96.5 

83.1 

83.1 




13.4 


13.4 


3.5 

100.0 

75.7 

62.6 

62.6 




13.1 


13.1 


24 . .3 

100.0 

94.4 

59.8 

59.8 




34.6 


34.6 


5 n 

100.0 

84.9 

32.2 

32.2 




52.7 


62. 7 


15 1 

100.0 

90.6 

29.8 

29.8 




60.8 


60.8 


9 4 

100.0 

96.4 

52.2 

52.2 




44.2 


44. 2 


.a n 

100.0 

89.8 

48.5 

48.5 




41.3 


41. 3 


10.2 

100.0 

90.1 

28.6 

28.6 




61.5 


59 4 

? 1 

9 9 

100.0 

69.3 

19.5 

19.5 


_L V . 

49.8 


47 4 

2, 4 

30 7 

100.0 

72.6 

29.8 

29.8 


1 

42.8 


40.7 

2.1 

27.4 


See footnotes at end of table. 


112 














































































































































































































































Xable C“12. Percentage distribution of amount of public and private assistance and earnings under specified 

Federal work programs, by urban area, 1929 —Continued 


Geographic division, State, 
and urban area > 

Total 
public 
and 
private 
funds ’ 

Public funds 

Private 
funds * 

Total 

General relief * 

Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 

Special types of public assistance 

Total 

Direct 

relief 

Work 

relief 

CivU 
Works 
Pro¬ 
gram < 

Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA« 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

children 

Aid to 
the 
blind 

North Central—C on. 













Missouri: 













Kansas City.. 

100.0 

38.3 






38.3 


8.3 

3ft ft 

8ftl 7 

St. Louis_ 

100.0 

41.5 

0.9 

0.9 




40.6 


11.8 

28 8 


Nebraska: Omaha_ 

100.0 

58.7 

29.7 

29.7 




29.0 


26.4 

2.6 

41.3 

Ohio: 











Akron_ 

100.0 

68.0 

35.1 

35.1 




32.9 


27.4 


39. ft 

Canton _ .. 

100.0 

81.8 

26.1 

26.1 




65.7 


28.0 

27. 7 

18. 2 

Cincinnati_ 

100.0 

65.1 

12.7 

12.7 

(0 



52.4 


42.3 

1ft 1 

34.9 

Cleveland__ 

100.0 

52.5 

8.7 

8.7 



43.8 


39.0 

4 8 

47.5 

Columbus.L... 

100.0 

87.3 

24.2 

24.2 




63.1 


43.9 

19.2 

12.7 

Dayton_ 

100.0 

63.2 

24.5 

24.5 




38.7 


26.3 

12.4 

36.8 

Springfield.... 

100.0 

48.4 

14.6 

14.6 




33.8 


27.8 

6.0 

51.6 

Toledo.... 

100.0 

90.6 

40.0 

40.0 




60.6 


42.7 

7.9 

9.4 

Youngstown_ 

100.0 

75.6 

33.1 

33.1 




42.5 


32.9 

9.6 

24.4 

Wisconsin: 













Kenosha__ 

100.0 

72.3 

46.1 

46.1 




26.2 


21.7 

4.6 

27.7 

Madison_ 

100.0 

96.0 

49.1 

49.1 




46.9 


42.4 

4.5 

4.0 

Milwaukee_ 

100.0 

76.8 

25.6 

25.6 




51.2 


44.0 

7.2 

23.2 

Racine . ___ 

100.0 

88.3 

33.5 

33.5 




64.8 


42.4 

12.4 

11.7 

South Atlantic and South 













Central 













Alabama: 













Birmingham_ 

100.0 











100.0 

Mobile”.___ 

100.0 











100.0 

Delaware: Wilmington.. _ 

100.0 

69.9 






69.9 


69.9 


30.1 

District of Columbia: Wash- 













ington_ .. .. .. .. 

100.0 

37.6 

2.1 

2.1 




35.5 


36.5 


62.4 

Florida: 













Jacksonville 

100. n 

94.1 

37.9 

37.9 




66.2 


56.2 


6.9 

Miami_ 

100.0 

74.0 

32.2 

32.2 




41.8 


41.8 


26.0 

Oeoreia: Atlanta 

100.0 

79.3 

79.3 

79.3 








20.7 

Kentuckv; Louisville 

100.0 

35.2 






35.2 

0.4 

24.7 

810. i 

8 64.8 

Louisiana: 













Mew Orleans . 

100.0 

2.8 






2.8 



2.8 

97.2 

Rhreveporf. 

100. 0 

17.9 

8.8 

8.8 




9.1 


9.1 


82.1 

\Tarylanf1* 'Raltimore 

100.0 

13.4 

13.4 

13.4 








86.6 

North Carolina: 














100.0 

12. 3 






12.3 


12.3 


87.7 


100.0 

29. 5 

17.8 

17.8 




11.7 


11.7 


70.5 


100.0 

96.5 

87.9 

87.9 




8.6 


8.6 


3.5 


100.0 

27.3 

19.7 

19.7 




7.6 


7.6 


72.7 


100.0 

85.3 

79.4 

79.4 




6.9 


6.9 


14.7 


100.0 

63 2 

63.2 

63.2 








36.8 

Tennessee: 













100.0 

24. 2 






24.2 


24.2 


7.5.8 


100. 0 

31.7 






31.7 


31.7 


68.3 


100. 0 

40 1 

40.1 

40.1 








69.9 

Texas: 














100 0 

59.9 

33.2 

33.2 




26.7 


26.7 


40.1 


100.0 

65. 2 

65.2 

65.2 








34.8 


100-0 

93 5 

93.5 

93. 5 








6.5 


100.0 

41 9 

22.0 

22. 0 




19.9 


19.9 


58.1 


100.0 

23 9 

23.9 

23. 9 








76.1 

Virginia: 













im ft 

46.0 

46.0 

46.0 








64.0 


100.0 

26 8 

18.5 

18.5 




8.3 


8.3 


73.2 


Iftft- ft 

38 4 

38.4 

38.4 








61.6 

West Virginia: Huntington.... 

100.0 

58.5 

25.9 

25.9 




32.6 


32.6 


41.5 

Mountain and Pacific 













California: 

Iftft ft 

90 3 

72.6 

72. 6 




17.7 


16.6 

2.1 

9.7 


ioo!o 

92.6 

36.5 

36.5 




56.1 


53.2 

2.9 

7.4 


Iftft ft 

85.0 

26. 2 

26.2 




68.8 


43.0 

15.8 

15.0 


Iftft ft 

75.8 

47.0 

47.0 




28.8 


26.4 

2.4 

24.2 


Iftft ft 

58 1 

2.1 


2.i 



66.0 


53.4 

2.6 

41.9 


Iftft ft 

73.5 

37.1 

37.1 




36.4 


26.0 

10.4 

26.6 


Iftft ft 

7« fi 

52.7 

52. 7 




25.8 


25.8 


21.5 


Iftft, ft 

43 1 

21.6 

21.6 




21.5 

3.1 

18.4 


56.9 

Washington: 

TOO 0 

79.0 

41.2 

40.0 

1.2 



37.8 


37.8 


21.0 

ocatlic- 

100.0 

87.9 

37.4 

37.4 




60.6 


50.5 


12.1 













* See app. A for the territory included in each urban area. Percentages 
based on figures which relate to territory other than that shown for the area 
in app. A are footnoted. ^ j - ^ 

’ Figures on which these percentages are based exclude cost of administra¬ 
tion; of materials, equipment, and other items incident to operation of work 
programs: and of transient care. 

> Figures on which these percentages are based include statutory aid to vet¬ 
erans administered on basis of need. 


* Not initiated until 1933. 

« Not initated until 1935. . 

« Figures on which these percentages are based include direct and work 
relief and aid to veterans. 

1 Less than 0.1 percent. 

• Figure on which this percentage is based relates to city. 


113 












































































































































































































Table C-13.—Percentage distribution of amount of public and private assistance and earnings under specified 

Federal work programs, by urban area, 1930 


Public funds 


Geographic division, State, 
and urban area * 

Total 
public 
and 
private 
funds * 

Total 

General relief * 

Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 

Special types of public assistance 

Private 
funds • 

Total 

Direct 

relief 

Work 

relief 

Civil 
Works 
Pro¬ 
gram * 

Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA » 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

children 

Aid to 
the 
blind 

Total. 

100.0 

76.1 

46.9 

44.4 

2.5 



29.2 

1.4 

25.2 

2.6 

23.9 

New England 













Connecticut: 













Bridgeport_ 

100.0 

89.2 

80.9 

30.7 

50.2 



8.3 


8.2 

,1 

10.8 

Hartford_ 

100.0 

69.8 

59.9 

54.1 

5.8 



9.9 


9. 5 

.4 

30.2 

New Britain...... 

100. 0 

91.6 

65.1 

65.1 




26.5 


26.4 

.1 

8.4 

New Haven.._ 

100.0 

70.2 

41.6 

28.5 

13.1 



28.6 


27.8 

.8 

29.8 

TVfainp- Portland 

100.0 

85.9 

72.9 

72.9 




13.0 


8.4 

4.6 

14.1 

Massachusetts: 













Boston .. _ __ 

100.0 

86.7 

69.9 

69.9 




16.8 


15.9 

.9 

13.3 

Brockton_ 

100. 0 

81. 5 

72.0 

62. 5 

9. 5 



9. 5 


8.1 

1 4 

18.5 

Cambridge. . .. _ 

100.0 

91. 2 

69.2 

69.2 




22. 0 


20. 2 

1.8 

8.8 

Fall River_ 

100.0 

99.6 

92.0 

92. 0 




7.6 


6.6 

1.0 

.4 

Lawrence.____ 

100.0 

92.8 

77.9 

77.9 




14.9 


14. 4 

. 5 

7. 2 

Lowell_ 

100 0 

88. 0 

67.6 

67.6 




20.4 


19. 3 

1.1 

12.0 

Lynn_ 

100.0 

80.6 

64.8 

64.8 




15.8 


15. 2 

.6 

19.4 

Malden_ 

100.0 

99.4 

92.7 

92.7 




6.7 


5.6 

1.1 

.6 

New Bedford_ 

100.0 

96.1 

88.7 

88.7 




7.4 


6. 7 

.7. 

3. 9 

Newton_ 

100.0 

84.3 

54.7 

54. 7 




29.6 


28.6 

1. 0 

15 7 

Springfield__ 

100.0 

82.6 

75.3 

75.3 




7.3 


6.8 

. 6 

17 4 

Worcester__ 

100.0 

91.0 

80.6 

80.6 




10.4 


9.4 

1.0 

Q 0 

Rhode Island; Providence_ 

100.0 

67.7 

32.7 

32.7 




35.0 


35.0 


32.3 

Middle Atlantic 












New Jersey: 













Jersey City_ 

100.0 

95.7 

29.9 

29.9 




65.8 


65.1 

.7 

4. 3 

Newark_ 

100.0 

84.0 

55.8 

55.8 




28.2 


27.6 

.6 

0 

Trenton__ 

100.0 

87.0 

36.5 

36.5 




50.5 


48. 5 

2.0 

13 ! 0 

New York: 











Albany__ 

100.0 

62.5 

39.1 

39.1 




23.4 


20,9 

2 6 

37 5 

Buffalo.. 

100.0 

87.9 

72.7 

69.0 

3.7 



15.2 


14. 6 

.6 

1 

New Rochelle.—.. 

100.0 

84.8 

57.1 

67.1 




27. 7 


25 8 

1.9 

15 2 

New York_ 

100.0 

64.3 

12.1 

12.1 




52. 2 


50. 8 

1 4 

35 7 

Niagara Falls... 

100.0 

84.8 

62.2 

54.9 

7.3 



22. 6 


22. 2 

.4 

15 2 

Rochester__ 

100.0 

86.6 

79.0 

74.0 

5.0 



7.6 


6 9 

, 7 

13 4 

Syracuse___ 

100.0 

85.1 

70.2 

70.2 




14. 9 


14 0 

g 

14 9 

Utica__ 

100.0 

67.7 

35.6 

35.6 




32.1 


30 1 

2 0 

32 3 

Yonkers__ 

100.0 

73.6 

33.6 

33.6 




40.0 


39 1 

.9 

26.4 

Pennsylvania: 











Allentown.. 

100.0 

78.3 

21.3 

21.3 




57.0 


57. 0 


21 7 

Altoona__ 

100.0 

75.3 

31.5 

31.5 




43.8 


43.8 


24 7 

Bethlehem.. 

100.0 

83.9 

57.8 

57.8 




26.1 


20 1 


16 1 

Chester__ 

100.0 

71.8 

33.5 

33.5 




38. 3 


38 3 


2 g 2 

Erie....—. 

100.0 

63.6 

30.8 

30.8 




32.8 


32 « 


36 4 

Johnstown.... 

100.0 

93.9 

58.3 

58.3 




35.6 


35 fi 


0 1 

Philadelphia. 

100.0 

39.5 

6.2 

6.2 




33.3 


33 3 


60 5 

Pittsburgh__ 

100.0 

64.3 

29.6 

29.6 




34.7 


34 7 


35 7 

Reading-.... 

100.0 

59.3 

24.6 

24.6 




34. 7 


34 7 


•? 

Scranton... 

100.0 

79.2 

48.6 

48.6 




30.6 


30 6 


20 3 

W ilkes-Barre... 

100.0 

96.1 

67.7 

67.7 




28.4 


28.4 


3.9 

North Central 











Illinois: 













Chicago.. 

100.0 

59.1 

23.9 

23.9 




35. 2 


25 1 

10 X 

n 

Springfield_ _ 

100.0 

85.4 

29.8 

29.8 




55. 6 


16! 5 

39.1 

14.6 

Indiana: 










Evansville__ 

100.0 

87.6 

80.3 

80.3 




7. 3 


7 3 


10 A 

Fort Wayne... 

100.0 

63.9 

53.3 

53.3 




10.6 


10 0 


36 1 

Indianapolis_ 

100.0 

65.7 

62.4 

62.4 




3.3 


3 3 


*iA Q 

South Bend_ 

100.0 

85.9 

72.6 

72.5 




13.4 


13. 4 


14 1 

Terre Haute_ 

100.0 

87.7 

78.4 

78.4 




9.3 


9.3 


12.3 

Iowa: 











Des Moines__ 

100.0 

71.7 

35.7 

35.7 




36.0 


25 3 

10 7 


Sioux City_ 

100.0 

74.4 

31.3 

31.3 




43.1 


32 ! 9 

10.2 

25.6 

Kansas: 










Kansas City_ 

100.0 

61.4 

60.1 

60.1 




1. 3 


1 3 



Topeka. 

100.0 

98.6 

86.0 

86.0 




12 . 6 


19 0 



Wichita... 

100.0 

78.0 

68.3 

68.3 




9.7 


9.7 


22.0 

Michigan: 











Detroit. 

100.0 

97.0 

85.3 

85.3 




11. 7 


11 7 



Flint.. 

100.0 

91.3 

65.0 

65.0 




26.3 


90 3 



Grand Rapids_ 

100.0 

88.0 

46.5 

46.5 




41. 5 


41 5 



Pontiac.__ 

100.0 

98.9 

79.4 

79.4 




19.6 


19 5 



Saginaw.. 

100.0 

90.1 

58.3 

58.3 




31.8 


31 ! 8 


9.9 

Minnesota: 











Duluth... 

100.0 

90.1 

37.0 

37.0 




53.1 


51 3 



Minneapolis.. 

100.0 

67.7 

25.9 

25.9 



. 

41.8 


30 4 

2 4 


St. Paul. 

100.0 

75.7 

34.2 

34.2 




41.6 


39.0 

2.5 

24.3 


See footnotes at end of table. 


114 


















































































































































































































































Table C—13 .—Percentage distribution of amount of public and private assistance and earnings under specified 

Federal work programs, by urban area, 1930 —Continued 


Public funds 


Geographic division, State, 
and urban area * 


North Central —Continued 
Missouri: 

Kansas City.. 

St. Louis_ 

Nebraska: Omaha_ 

Ohio: 

Akron__ 

Canton__ 

Cincinnati__ 

Cleveland--- 

Columbus__ 

Dayton_ 

Springfield-- 

Toledo__-. 

Y oungstown . .... 

Wisconsin: 

Kenosha_ 

Madison___ 

Milwaukee--- 

Racine.--.... 


South Atlantic and South 
Central 

Alabama: 

Birmingham__ 

Mobile_ 

Delaware: Wilmingrton_ 

District of Columbia: Wash¬ 
ington_ 

Florida: 

Jacksonville... 

Miami___ 

Georgia: Atlanta- 

Kentucky: Louisville- 

Louisiana: 

New Orleans- 

Shreveport—.-. 

Maryland: Baltimore_ 

North Carolina: 

Asheville- 

Charlotte... 

Greensboro- 

Winston-Salem- 

Oklahoma: Tulsa.... 

South Carolina: Charleston.. 
Tennessee: 

Knoxville... 

Memphis- 

Nashville- 

Texas: 

Dallas_ 

El Paso-- 

Fort Worth- 

Houston-- 

San Antonio- 

Virginia: 

Norfolk- 

Richmond--. 

Roanoke-- 

West Virginia: Huntington.. 

Mountain and Pacific 
California: 

Los Angeles-- 

Oakland.. 

Sacramento- 

San Diego..-. 

San Francisco.. 

Colorado: Denver.... 

Oregon: Portland- 

Utah: Salt Lake City... 

Washington: 

Seattle.. 

Tacoma___ 


Total 
public 
and 
private 
funds * 


100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 


100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 


100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 


Total 


37.7 

35.3 
66.0 

61.2 

61.4 

60.8 

54.7 
85.6 

36.5 

50.3 

90.8 

57.3 

77.8 

94.8 

84.6 
90.1 


6.7 

59.6 

33.7 

94.4 

75.7 

76.2 

56.2 

2.9 

18.0 

23.0 

7.6 

25.5 

97.9 

21.4 

70.3 

64.9 

19.6 

23.9 

40.8 

59.7 
62.0 

93.6 

37.8 

20.7 

57.5 

27.7 

23.5 

42.7 


93.0 

96.0 

90.7 

93.7 
71.0 
69.2 

78.9 

48.9 

82.6 

88.9 


General relief * 


Total 


0.9 

30.8 

41.7 
23.0 
21.0 

32.9 
35.4 

15.7 

24.3 

74.1 

29.4 

54.1 

44.8 

55.8 
61.3 


Direct 

relief 


6.7 


1.7 

40.5 
31.4 
76.2 

’ 21.8 

.1 

7.9 

13.6 


19.8 
93.7 
16.4 
60.6 

64.9 


40.8 

34.4 
62.0 

93.6 

20.2 

20.7 

57.5 

20.2 

23.5 
24.3 


69.5 

38.1 

25.2 

47.7 

20.0 

26.7 
57.4 

16.7 

48.1 

41.9 


0.9 

30.8 

41.7 
23.0 

10.3 
5.0 

35.4 

15.7 

24.3 

64.5 

29.4 

54.1 

44.8 

50.4 
61.3 


6.7 


1.7 

40.5 
31.4 
76.2 

’ 14.5 

.1 

7.9 

13.6 


19.8 
67.2 
16.4 
60.6 

64.9 


40.8 

34.4 
62.0 

93.6 

20.2 

20.7 

41.3 

20.2 

23.5 

24.3 


69.5 

38.1 

25.2 
46.0 


26.7 
47.5 

16.7 

42.7 
41.9 


3 

Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 

Special types of public assistance 

Private 
funds« 

Work 

relief 

Civil 
Works 
Pro¬ 
gram * 

Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA « 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

children 

Aid to 
the 
blind 




37.7 


8.6 

29.1 

’62.3 




34.4 


6.5 

27.9 

64.7 




35.2 


32. 6 

2. 7 

34.0 




19.5 


16.9 

3.6 

38.8 




38.4 


20. 4 

18.0 

38.6 

10.7 



39.8 


32.1 

7.7 

39.2 

27.9 



21.8 


19.2 

2.6 

45.3 




50. 2 


33.7 

16.5 

14.4 




20.8 


14.2 

6.6 

63.6 




26.0 


21.9 

4.1 

49.7 

9.6 



16.7 


13.6 

3.1 

9.2 




27.9 


21. 0 

6.9 

42.7 




23.7 

5.3 

16.8 

2.6 

22.2 




50.0 


45.2 

4.8 

6.2 

5.4 



28.8 

3.6 

22.1 

3.2 

16.4 




28.8 


22.1 

6.7 

9.9 








100.0 








93.3 




59.6 


59.6 


40.4 




32.0 


32.0 


66.3 




63.9 


53.9 


6.6 




44.3 


44.3 


24.3 








23.8 

’7.3 



34.4 

1.1 

25.3 

’8.0 

’43.8 




2.8 



2.8 

97.1 




10.1 


6.9 

3.2 

82.0 




9.4 


5.4 

4.0 

77.0 




7.6 


7.6 


92.4 




5.7 


6.7 


74.5 

26. 5 



4.2 


4.2 


2.1 




5.0 


5.0 


78.6 




9.7 


9.7 


29.7 








35.1 




19.6 


19.6 


80.4 




23.9 


23.9 


76.1 








69.2 




25.3 


25.3 


40.3 








38.0 








6.4 




17.6 


17.6 


62.2 








79.3 

16.2 







42.6 



7.5 


7.6 


72.3 








76.6 




18.4 


18.4 


67.3 




23.5 

9.4 

9.8 

4.3 

7.0 




67.9 

18.4 

33.6 

6.0 

4.0 




65.5 

31.4 

24.7 

9.4 

9.3 

1.7 



46.0 

27.6 

13.9 

4.6 

6.3 

20.0 



51.0 

12.9 

34.1 

4.0 

29.0 



42.5 


30.8 

11.7 

30.8 

9.9 



21.5 


21.5 


21.1 



32.2 

18.6 

13.6 


61.1 

5.4 



34.5 


34.6 


17.4 



47.0 


47.0 


11.1 










1 See app. A for the territory included in each urban area. Percentages 
based on figures which relate to territory other than that shown for the area 

'°»^F&ms^on^whU*these percentages are based exclude cost of admin^tra- 
tion; ^materials, equipment, and other items mcident to operation of work 

^^f^ures^on which ^theL°%rcentages are based include statutory aid to 
veterans administered on basis of need. 


* Not initiated until 1933. 

‘ Not initiated imtil 1935. , . , ^ ^ 

« Figures on which these percentages are based mclude direct and work 
relief and aid to veterans. ^ 

’ Figure on which this percentage is based relates to city. 


115 

































































































































































































Table C—14 .—Percentage distribution of amount of public and private assistance and earnings under specified 

Federal work programs, by urban area, 1931 


Public funds 


Geographic division, State, 
and urban area' 

Total 
public 
and 
private 
funds * 

Total 

General relief * 

Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 

Special types of public assistance 

Private 
funds • 

Total 

Direct 

relief 

Work 

relief 

Civil 
Works 
Pro¬ 
gram < 

Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA « 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

children 

Aid to 
the 
blind 

Total... 

100.0 

71.0 

51.1 

38.7 

12.4 



19.9 

5.8 

12.9 

1.2 

29.0 

New England 













Connecticut: 













Bridgeport-. 

100.0 

89. 4 

84. 2 

38.3 

45.9 



5.2 


5.1 

.1 

10.6 

Hartford . . 

100. 0 

77.8 

72. 6 

61. 6 

11.0 



6.2 


5.0 

.2 

22.2 

New Britain.. _ . 

100.0 

79.3 

70.3 

70.3 




9.0 


9.0 


20.7 

New Haven ___ 

100.0 

83.4 

72. 7 

19.8 

52.9 



10.7 


10.3 

.4 

16.6 

Maine: Portland. 

100. 0 

91. 3 

83. 9 

41. 6 

42.4 



7.4 


4.7 

2.7 

8.7 

Massachusetts: 













Boston___ 

100.0 

91.6 

80.1 

80.1 




11.5 

.8 

10.1 

.6 

8.4 

Brockton_ __ 

100.0 

86.9 

71.3 

70.6 

. 7 



15.6 

8.3 

6.2 

1.1 

13.1 

Cambridge__ 

100.0 

88.0 

70. 7 

70.7 




17.3 

1.8 

14.1 

1.4 

12.0 

Fall River.. 

100.0 

91.6 

83.1 

83.1 




8.5 

3. 2 

4.4 

.9 

8.4 

Lawrence.- __ . .-. 

100.0 

93.1 

76.0 

75.0 




18.1 

4.9 

12.6 

.6 

6.9 

Lowell_ 

100.0 

91.2 

74.8 

59.1 

15. 7 



16.4 

2.4 

13.2 

.8 

8.8 

Lynn__ 

100.0 

89. 7 

74.0 

74.0 




15.7 

6.3 

8.9 

.6 

10.3 

Maldp.n 

100. 0 

98 3 

94 7 

8 fi. 0 

8.7 



3. 6 

.7 

2.4 

.5 

1.7 

New Bedford__ 

100.0 

96.3 

86.9 

86.9 



9.4 

2.3 

6.6 

.6 

3.7 

Newton____ 

100.0 

78.9 

57.8 

39.8 

18.0 



21.1 

5.1 

16.4 

.6 

21.1 

Springfield__ 

100.0 

89.8 

84.5 

84.5 




5.3 

1.4 

3.6 

.3 

10.2 

Worcester_ 

100.0 

92.1 

85.2 

85.2 




6.9 

.5 

5.8 

.6 

7.9 

Rhode Island: Providence_ 

100.0 

43.3 

33. 7 

27.0 

6.7 



9.6 


9.6 


56.7 

Middle Atlantic 













New Jersey: 













Jersey City__ 

100.0 

87.8 

58.6 

57.9 

.7 



29.2 


28.6 

.6 

12.2 

Newark_ 

100.0 

86.9 

74.1 

67.4 

6.7 



12.8 


12. 4 

.4 

13.1 

Trenton____ 

100.0 

66. 7 

48.3 

41.0 

7.3 



18.4 


17.6 

.8 

33.3 

New York: 













Albany.. 

100.0 

73.0 

31.0 

27. 6 

3. 4 



42. 0 

28. 4 

12. 3 

1.3 

27.0 

Buflalb___ 

100.0 

90.1 

78.5 

69. 7 

8.8 



11.6 

4. 3 

7.0 

.3 

9.9 

New Rochelle___ 

100.0 

94.3 

71.3 

35. 7 

35.6 



23.0 

10.7 

11. 7 

.6 

5.7 

New York_ 

100.0 

63.6 

26. 5 

8.6 

17.9 



37.1 

16.0 

20. 7 

.4 

36.4 

Niagara FaUs..__ ... 

100.0 

91. 3 

76. 2 

63.0 

13. 2 



15.1 

5. 0 

9.9 

.2 

8. 7 

Rochester_ 

100.0 

92.7 

83. 3 

67. 7 

15. 6 



9.4 

6. 0 

3.1 

.3 

7.3 

Syracuse___ 

100.0 

93.8 

81. 4 

48. 6 

32. 8 



12. 4 

8.8 

3. 4 

. 2 

6.2 

Utica.. 

100.0 

66.9 

38. 4 

29.0 

9.4 



28.5 

13.0 

14.6 

.9 

33.1 

Yonkers.... 

100.0 

68.4 

44. 9 

44. 5 

. 4 



23. 5 

7. 6 

15. 6 

.3 

31. 6 

Pennsylvania: 













Allentown_ 

100.0 

65.3 

12.1 

12.1 




63.2 


53. 2 


34.7 

Altoona...... 

100.0 

72.6 

46. 4 

46.4 




26. 2 


26.2 


27.4 

Bethlehem. .. 

100.0 

90.5 

82.0 

50.9 

31.1 



8. 5 


8. 5 


9. 5 

Chester_ 

100.0 

66.3 

42.2 

41. 7 

. 5 



24.1 


24.1 


33.7 

Erie...... 

100.0 

78.1 

62. 7 

62.7 




15. 4 


15. 4 


21. 9 

Johnstown.__ 

100.0 

86.2 

64.3 

64.3 




21.9 


21. 9 


13.8 

Philadelphia-__ 

100.0 

42.6 

34.9 

34.9 




7. 7 


7. 7 


57. 4 

Pittsburgh_ 

100.0 

31.7 

20.5 

20.5 




11. 2 


11. 2 


68. 3 

Reading__ 

100.0 

73.8 

55.6 

38. 5 

17.1 



18.2 


18.2 


26. 2 

Scranton.__ 

100.0 

72.8 

47. 7 

47.7 




25.1 


25.1 


27. 2 

Wilkes-Barre__ 

100.0 

94.9 

71.0 

71.0 




23.9 


23.9 


5.1 

Nobth Central 













Illinois: 













Chicago___ 

100.0 

36.6 

24.0 

24.0 




11.6 


8.3 

3.3 

64.4 

Springfield_ 

100.0 

64.6 

21.1 

21.1 




43. 6 


9.4 

34.1 

35.4 

Indiana: 










Evansville_ 

100.0 

82.0 

77.2 

77.2 




4.8 


4.8 


18.0 

Fort Wayne__ 

100.0 

46.6 

43.6 

43.6 




3.0 


3.0 


53. 4 

Indianapolis_ 

100.0 

80.6 

79.2 

79.2 




1.4 


1 4 


19 4 

South Bend_ __ 

100.0 

93.7 

89.5 

89. 5 




4.2 


4 2 


6 3 

Terre Haute... 

100.0 

77.9 

67.7 

67.7 




10.2 


10. 2 


22.1 

Iowa: 













Des Moines__ 

100.0 

66.0 

38.8 

38.7 

. 1 



27. 2 


17.9 

Q 3 

34 0 

Sioux City_ . 

100.0 

82.8 

67.4 

39. 8 

17.6 



25.4 


18.8 

6.6 

17.2 

Kansas: 










Kansas City_ 

100.0 

59.4 

58.6 

58.6 




.8 


. 8 


40 6 

Topeka.. 

100.0 

97.8 

88.1 

55.1 

33.0 



9.7 


9.7 


2 2 

Wichita_ 

100.0 

73.5 

64.7 

63.6 

1.1 



8.8 


8.8 


26.5 

Michigan: 











Detroit__ 

100.0 

96.6 

86.2 

79.7 

6.5 



10.4 


10 4 


3 4 

Flint.. 

100.0 

93.9 

73.1 

73.1 




20.8 


20 8 


oil 

Grand Rapids... 

TOO.O 

96.1 

82.3 

26.8 

56.5 



13.8 


13. 8 


, 3 9 

Pontiac___ 

100.0 

99.4 

78.8 

78.8 




20. 6 


20 6 


6 

Saginaw__ .. 

100.0 

96.5 

79.8 

79.8 




16.7 


16 7 


3 ! 5 

Minnesota: 












Duluth_ 

100.0 

93.2 

49.1 

45.6 

3.5 



44.1 

9 3 


1 3 

6 8 

Minneapolis_ 

100.0 

63.6 

42. 7 

36.4 

6.3 



20 9 

1 s 

IR n 

1 \ 

36 4 

St. Paul.. 

100.0 

71.3 

37.7 

37.7 




33.6 

L3 

3a 2 

2.1 

28.7 


See footnotes at end of table; 


116 























































































































































































































Table C-U.—Percentage distribution of amount of public and private assistance and 

Federal work programs, by urban area, i95i—Continued 


earnings 


under specified 


Geographic division, State, 
and urban area > 

Total 
public 
and 
private 
funds * 

Public funds 

Private 
funds» 

Total 

General relief * 

Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 

Special types of public assistance 

Total 

Direct 

relief 

Work 

relief 

Civil 
W'orks 
Pro¬ 
gram f 

Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPAS 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

children 

Aid to 
the 
blind 

North Central—C on. 













Missouri: 













Kansas City... 

100.0 

16.4 






4 





St. Louis_ 

100.0 

44.5 

28.8 

24.1 

4.7 



15 7 




® 83.6 

Nebraska: Omaha_ 

100. 0 

56.1 

26.0 

26.0 




3o; 1 


27.6 

11. 5 

2.5 

65. 5 
43.9 

Ohio: 









Akron... 

100.0 

78.8 

67.5 

67.5 




a 


9 0 


21.2 

Canton... 

100.0 

57.2 

39.1 

39.1 




18 1 




Cincinnati_ 

100.0 

63.4 

47.0 

26.3 

20. 7 



Ifi 4 


13 5 


42.8 

Cleveland __ 

100.0 

59.9 

45.7 

39.6 

6.1 



14 9. 


12 5 


36.6 

Columbus_ 

100.0 

83.5 

55.0 

52.9 

2.1 



28 JS 


19 7 


40.1 

Dayton.. 

100.0 

79.1 

64.7 

29.3 

35.4 



14 4 


9 7 



Springfield_ 

100.0 

58.0 

42.5 

42. 5 




15 5 


12 4 


20.9 

Toledo___ 

100.0 

94.8 

85.5 

73.5 

12.0 



Q. 3 


7 4 



Youngstown_ 

100.0 

47.8 

31.5 

31.5 




16 3 


1L6 

4.7 

5. 2 
52.2 

Wisconsin: 










Kenosha.--__ 

100.0 

89.1 

68.4 

68.4 




20 7 

4.6 

14 3 



Madison__ 

100.0 

88.9 

43.6 

43.6 




45. 3 

40 9 



Milwaukee... 

100.0 

93.0 

75.2 

57.6 

17.6 



17 8 

2.9 

^3 5 



Racine..... 

100.0 

97.6 

86.0 

72.1 

12.9 



12. 6 

io!4 

2.2 

2.4 

South Atlantic and 










South Central 













Alabama: 













Birmingham 

100.0 

63.8 

63.8 


53.8 







2 

Mobile... 

100.0 

24.4 

24.4 

24.4 








75 6 

Delaware: Wilmington_ 

100.0 

' 16.7 

.4 


.4 



16.3 

5.0 

11 3 


83.3 

District of Columbia: Wash- 












ineton__ _ 

100.0 

26.7 

1.2 

1.2 




25. 5 


25 5 


73.3 

Florida: 












Jacksonville 

100.0 

71.9 

30.9 

30.9 




41.0 


41.0 


98 1 

Miami 

100 0 

72.5 

31.7 

31.7 




40.8 


40 8 


27 5 

Georgia: Atlanta_ 

100.0 

52.6 

52.6 

52.6 








47 4 

Kentucky: Louisiville__ 

100.0 

73.5 

*53.5 

» 26.3 

« 27. 2 



20.0 

1.6 

13.3 

* 5.1 

« 26 5 

Louisiana: 













New Orleans.._ 

100.0 

16.0 

14.6 


14.6 



1.4 



1 4 

84 0 

Shreveport 

100.0 

31.9 

19.7 

19.7 




12. 2 


8.0 

4 9 

08 1 

Maryland: Baltimore_ 

100.0 

28.8 

20.6 

20.6 




8.2 

2. 5 

2.8 

2.9 

7L2 

North Carolina: 











Asheville___ 

100.0 

62.4 

57.7 

57.7 




4.7 


4.7 


37 fi 

Charlotte. _ _ 

100.0 

37.5 

33.8 

33.8 




3.7 


3.7 


62 F, 

Greensboro_ 

100.0 

98.6 

95.4 

52.9 

42.5 



3.2 


3.2 


1 4 

Winston-Salem__ 

100.0 

36.7 

33.3 

33.3 




3.4 


3.4 


63 3 

Oklahoma: Tulsa _ 

100.0 

50.3 

45.7 

45.7 




4.6 


4.6 


4Q 7 

South Carolina: Charleston... 

100.0 

62.3 

62.3 

62.3 








37. 7 

Tennes.see: 













Knoxville_ _ 

100. 0 

18. 5 






18. 5 


18.5 


81 

Memphis_ ... ... 

100.0 

15.0 






15.0 


15.0 


85 0 

Nash^lle_ 

100.0 

46.8 

46.8 

46.8 








53 2 

Texas: 













Dallas .. 

100 0 

72.0 

57.6 

31.6 

26.0 



14.4 


14.4 


28 0 

El Paso.. _ 

100.0 

80.5 

80.5 

28.0 

52.5 







19. 5 

Fort Worth 

100.0 

95.1 

95.1 

95.1 








4.9 

TTouston 

100.0 

2.5.2 

14.2 

14.2 




11.0 


11.0 


74. 8 

San Antonin 

100.0 

16.6 

16.6 

16.6 








83.4 

Virginia: 













Norfolk 

100.0 

41.2 

41.2 

36.5 

4.7 







58.8 

Richmond__..._ 

100.0 

45.3 

40.1 

40.1 




5.2 


6.2 


54.7 

Roanokft 

100 0 

46.8 

46.8 

46.8 








53.2 

Wr'sf. TTiinfinption 

100.0 

39.1 

28.9 

28.9 




10.2 


10.2 


60.9 

Mountain and Pacific 













California: 













TaOS Anpftlps 

100.0 

91.0 

76.2 

42.4 

33.8 



14.8 

7.4 

4.7 

2.7 

9.0 

Oakland 

100.0 

96.9 

51.4 

51.4 

(') 



45.5 

17.4 

23.5 

4.6 

3.1 


100.0 

89. 7 

24. 1 

24. 1 




66.6 

38.5 

20.2 

6.9 

10.3 

San 'Diego 

100.0 

95.0 

69.6 

50.4 

9.2 



35.4 

24.2 

8.7 

2.5 

5.0 

Ran FrftTif*i.9Pr» 

100.0 

84.7 

69.5 

. 1 

59.4 



25.2 

9.1 

14.1 

2.0 

15.3 


100 0 

65.3 

24.1 

24.1 




31.2 


23.1 

8.1 

44.7 


100 0 

93.5 

87.3 

14.3 

73.0 



6.2 


6.2 


6.5 


100 0 

46.0 

20.3 

20.3 




25.7 

14.3 

11.4 


54.0 

Washington: 














100.0 

75.1 

53.4 

30.3 

23.1 



21.7 


21.7 


24.9 


100.0 

80.3 

42.4 

42.4 




37.9 


.37.9 


19.7 















> See app. A for the territory included in each urban area. Percentages 
based on figures which relate to territory other than that shown for the area 
in app. A are footnoted. 

• Figures on which these percentages are based exclude cost of administra¬ 
tion; of materials, equipment, and other items incident to operation of work 
programs; and of transient care. 

* Figures on which these percentages are based include statutory aid to 
veterans administered on basis of need. 


< Not initiated until 1933. 

» Not initiated until 1935. 

* Figures on which these percentages are based include direct and work 
relief and aid to veterans. 

’ Less than 0.1 percent. 

• Figure on which this percentage is based relates to city. 


117 






































































































































































































Table C—15.—Percentage distribution of amount of public and private assistance and earnings under specified 

Federal work programs, by urban area, 1932 


Public funds 


Geographic division, State, 
and urban area' 

Total 
public 
and 
private 
funds > 

Total 

General relief® 

•N 

Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 

Special types of public assistance 

Private 
funds * 

Total 

Direct 

relief 

Work 

relief 

Civil 
Works 
Pro¬ 
gram ‘ 

Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA « 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

children 

Aid to 
the 
blind 

Total__- 

100.0 

81.6 

68.0 

51.8 

16.2 



13.6 

4.9 

7.9 

0.8 

18.4 

New England 













Connecticut: 













Bridgeport_- _ 

100.0 

91.0 

88.0 

49.2 

38.8 



3.0 


2.9 

,1 

9.0 

Hartford 

100.0 

66.1 

62.0 

57.1 

4.9 



4.1 


4.0 

.1 

33.9 

NTpw ■Rritain 

100.0 

92.5 

88.3 

88.3 




4.2 


4.2 

V) 

7.6 

■ NTpw ■Ravpn 

100.0 

81.1 

73.1 

26.9 

46.2 



8.0 


7.7 

.3 

18.9 

TVTftino : Portland 

100.0 

90.6 

84.6 

84.6 




' 6.0 


3.9 

2.1 

9.4 

Massachusetts: 













Boston __ 

100.0 

82.6 

69.7 

69.7 




12.9 

6.5 

6.0 

.4 

17.4 

Prookton . 

100.0 

91.2 

72.0 

72.0 




19.2 

13.6 

4.9 

.7 

8.8 

Cambridge - ___ 

100.0 

85.7 

69.6 

69.6 




16.1 

8.0 

7.2 

.9 

14.3 

Pall Rivp.r 

100.0 

93.7 

78.3 

78.3 




15.4 

10.1 

4.6 

.7 

6.3 

Lawrence _ 

100.0 

95.9 

78.3 

78.3 




17.6 

10.7 

6.6 

.3 

4.1 

TiOwpll 

100.0 

92.8 

71.7 

71.7 




21.1 

9.8 

10.7 

.6 

7.2 

Lynn ___ 

100.0 

95.1 

76.4 

76 . 4 




18.7 

13.6 

4.8 

.3 

4.9 

Malden . _ 

100.0 

99.6 

91.4 

91.4 




8.2 

6.9 

1.0 

.3 

.4 

New Bedford _ 

100.0 

97.5 

81.5 

81 . 5 




16.0 

10.0 

5.7 

.3 

2.6 

Newton ___ 

100.0 

75 . 7 

54.3 

54.3 




21.4 

11.6 

9.2 

.6 

24.3 

Springfield_ 

100.0 

93.0 

86.6 

86.6 




6 . 4 

4.7 

1.5 

.2 

7.0 

Worcester _- 

100.0 

94.1 

84.5 

84.5 




9.6 

5.7 

3.5 

.4 

6.9 

Phodp T .«; land * Providonop 

100 . 0 

92 . 7 

87.8 

41 . 2 

46 . 6 



4.9 


4.9 


7.3 

Middle Atlantic 













New Jersey: 













Jersey City _ 

100.0 

89.5 

76.1 

62.6 

13.5 



13.4 


13.0 

.4 

10.6 

Newark ___ 

100.0 

93.7 

83.3 

53.6 

29 . 7 



10.4 

1.5 

8.5 

.4 

6.3 

Trenton _ 

100.0 

66.9 

54.8 

43.1 

11 . 7 



12.1 

2.3 

9.4 

.4 

33.1 

New York: 













Albanv . .. __ 

100.0 

89.6 

71.6 

26.8 

44.8 



18 . 0 

11.4 

6.8 

.8 

10.4 

Buffalo_ _ 

100.0 

93.0 

85.5 

69.6 

15.9 



7 . 5 

3.8 

3.5 

.2 

7.0 

New Rochelle __ 

100.0 

98.9 

90.1 

40.8 

49.3 



8.8 

5.3 

3.3 

.2 

1.1 

New York _ 

100.0 

72.6 

48.0 

22.7 

25 . 3 



24.6 

11.3 

13.1 

.2 

27.4 

Niagara Falls _ 

100.0 

98.4 

92.0 

57 . 5 

34 . 5 



6 . 4 

2 . 2 

4 1 

.1 

1.6 

Porhpster _ _ 

100.0 

97.1 

84 . 2 

70.8 

13 . 4 



12.9 

9.8 

2.8 

.3 

2.9 

Syracuse __ 

100.0 

97.8 

87.9 

51.7 

36 . 2 



9.9 

7.5 

2.2 

.2 

2.2 

Utica. _ 

100.0 

93.2 

74.0 

39.9 

34.1 



19.2 

10.9 

7.9 

' .4 

6.8 

Yonkers_ 

100.0 

95.4 

85.8 

50.1 

35 . 7 



9.6 

4.3 

6.2 

.1 

4.6 

Pennsylvania: 













Allentown ____ 

100.0 

69.3 

13.3 

13.3 




56.0 


56.0 


30 . 7 


100.0 

75.3 

65.4 

65 . 4 




9.9 


9.9 


24 7 

Bethlehem ____ 

100.0 

89.9 

76 . 5 

76.5 




13.4 


13 . 4 


10.1 

Chester__ 

100.0 

91.4 

81.1 

81.1 




10.3 


10.3 


8 . 6 

Erie . __ 

100.0 

91 . 5 

83.0 

83 . 0 




8 . 5 


8 . 5 


8 . 6 

Johnstown _ 

100.0 

96.0 

67.3 

67.3 




28 . 7 


28 . 7 


4 0 

Philadelphia_ 

100 . 0 

52 . 6 

45.9 

45.9 




6 . 7 


6 . 7 


47 4 

Pittsburgh _ 

100 . 0 

67 . 0 

61.1 

61.1 




5.9 


5 . 9 


33 0 

Reading __ 

100.0 

87.6 

81.2 

68.6 

12 . 6 



6 . 4 


6 . 4 


12 4 

Scranton_ 

100.0 

83.4 

67.4 

67.4 




16.0 


16.0 


16.6 

Wilkes-Barre _-_ 

100.0 

92.6 

78.4 

68.6 

9.8 



14 .? 


14.2 


7.4 

North Central 











Illinois: 













Chicago_ 

100.0 

89.8 

85.8 

80.2 

5.6 



4.0 


2.8 

1.2 

10.2 

Springfield_ 

100.0 

83.3 

62.1 

62.1 




21 . 2 


6.5 

15.7 

16 7 

Indiana: 













Evansville_ 

100.0 

86.6 

84.4 

84.4 




2.2 


2.2 


13 4 

Fort Wayne_ 

100.0 

72.8 

71.2 

71.2 




1.6 


1.6 


27 2 

Indianapolis_ 

100.0 

86.6 

85.8 

85.8 




.8 


.8 


13 4 

South Bend_ 

100.0 

97.3 

94.3 

94.3 




3.0 


3.0 


2 7 

Terre Haute_ 

100.0 

85.0 

79.4 

79 . 4 




5.6 


5.6 


16.0 

Iowa: 












Des Moines_ 

100.0 

78.3 

64.6 

64.6 




13.7 


8.9 

4.8 

91 7 

Sioux City__ 

100.0 

91.4 

77.9 

66.9 

11.0 



13.5 


10.2 

3.3 

8.6 

Kansas: 












Kansas City_ 

100.0 

44.3 

44.0 

21.4 

22 . 6 



.3 


.3 


55 7 

Topeka___ 

100.0 

98.2 

91.2 

40.3 

50.9 



7.0 


7.0 


1 ft 

Wichita_ 

100.0 

80.1 

74.0 

49.0 

25.0 



6.1 


6.1 


19.9 

Michigan: 












Detroit__ 

100.0 

91.6 

79.2 

61.9 

17.3 



12.4 


12.4 


8 4 

Flint.... 

100.0 

92.7 

79.7 

79.7 




13.0 


13.0 


7 3 

Grand Rapids_ 

100.0 

98.4 

90.7 

64.4 

26.3 



7.7 


7 . 7 


1 6 

Pontine 

100.0 

99.5 

89.0 

89.0 




10.5 


10 . 6 


5 

Saginaw_ 

100.0 

95.8 

77.3 

77.3 




18 . 5 


18 . 5 


4.2 

Minnesota: 












Duluth_ 

100.0 

96.7 

77.9 

69.7 

8.2 



18.8 

5.7 

12 . 5 

.6 

3 3 

Minneapolis_ 

100.0 

80.6 

65.2 

62.5 

2.7 



15.4 

5 . 8 * 

9.1 

. 6 

4 

St. Paul__ 

100.0 

66.8 

48.4 

48.4 




18.4 

5.6 

12.1 

.8 

33.2 


See footnotes at end of table. V 


118 





















































































































































































































Table C-15. Percentage distribution of amount of public and private assistance and earnings under specified 

Federal work programs, by urban area, 1932—Continued 




Public funds 


Geographic division. State, 
and urban area i 

Total 
public 
and 
private 
funds - 

Total 

General relief ’ 

Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 

Special types of public assistance 

Private 
funds 8 


Total 

Direct 

relief 

Work 

relief 

Civil 
Works 
Pro¬ 
gram * 

Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA5 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

children 

Aid to 
the 
blind 

North Central—C on. 













Missouri: 

Kansas City_ 

100.0 

37.1 

« 24.0 

8 24.0 




13.1 

7 d 


3.7 

1.8 
16.8 

5.8 

8.5 

6.6 
8.3 
8.6 
6.6 

9.7 
8.0 

4.9 

8.8 
20.5 

7.7 

8.1 

9.4 
5.6 
2.0 

1.2 

6.2 

1.5 
1.1 

3.5 

2.6 
2.1 
2.2 
2.3 

1.1 

2.2 

8 62.9 
68.3 
50.5 

12.7 

St. Louis... 

100.0 

41.7 

34.3 

34.3 





Nebraska: Omaha 

100.0 

49.5 

30.7 

30.7 


1 


18.8 

7.0 

14.7 
8.1 
9.4 

12.0 

9.2 

11.8 
10.2 

7.2 

12.6 

22.7 

10.4 

9.7 


Ohio: 

Akron___ 

100.0 

87.3 

80.3 

80.3 





Canton_ 

100.0 

65.5 

50.8 

50.8 





Cincinnati_ 

100.0 

89.5 

81.4 

47.4 

34.0 




o4. 0 
10.6 
22.2 
8.7 
7.4 
33.9 

2.3 
7.0 

10.2 

4.0 

3.3 
20.2 

Cleveland...__ 

100.0 

77.8 

68.4 

68.4 




Columbus.-. 

100.0 

91.3 

79.3 

27.7 

51. 6 




Dayton_ 

100.0 

92.6 

83.4 

69. 7 

13.7 




Springfield.. 

100.0 

66.1 

54.3 

54.3 




Toledo.. 

100.0 

97.7 

87.5 

87.5 





Youngstown.... 

100.0 

93.0 

85.8 

80.2 

5.6 




Wisconsin: 

Kenosha__ 

100.0 

89.8 

77.2 

77.2 



2.7 

Madison__ 

100.0 

96.0 

73.3 

73.3 




Milwaukee_ 

100.0 

96.7 

86.3 

73.7 

12.6 



2.0 

Racine_ _ 

100.0 

79.8 

70.1 

68.3 

1.8 



L6 

South Atlantic and South 
Central 







Alabama: 

Birmingham_ 

100.0 

69.7 

69.7 

50.4 

19.3 







30.3 

92.8 
61.1 

67.6 

9.6 

14.3 
23.2 

8 28.2 

30.6 
41.1 
23.0 

37.7 

17.7 
.8 

33.9 

26.8 
46.8 

Mobile_ 

100.0 

7.2 

7.2 

7.2 








Delaware: Wilmington.. . . 

100.0 

38.9 

28.4 

12.4 

16.0 



10.5 

6.1 

4.4 

9.9 

17.3 

18.1 


District of Columbia: Wash¬ 
ington_ 

100.0 

32.4 

22.5 

7.9 

14.6 



9.9 


Florida: 

Jacksonville_ 

100.0 

90.4 

73.1 

34.8 

38.3 



17.3 



Miami_ 

100.0 

85.7 

67.6 

20.4 

47.2 



18.1 



Georgia: Atlanta.. 

100.0 

76.8 

76.8 

67.6 

9.2 





Kentucky; Louisville__ 

100.0 

71.8 

» 59.2 

8 18.0 

8 41.2 



12.6 

1.1 

8.2 

8 3.3 

.8 

3.9 

1.1 

Louisiana; 

New Orleans_ 

100.0 

69.4 

68.6 

6.6 

62.0 



.8 

Shreveport__ 

100.0 

58.9 

51.4 

4. 2 

47.2 



7.6 


3.6 
1.0 

1.7 

1.8 

Maryland; Baltimore_ 

100.0 

77.0 

73.2 

34.3 

38.9 



3.8 

1.7 

North Carolina: 

Asheville..__ 

100.0 

62.3 

60.6 

18.2 

42.4 



1.7 

Charlotte..... 

100.0 

82.3 

80.5 

60.6 

19.9 



1.8 



Greensboro__ 

100.0 

99.2 

96.6 

96.6 




2.6 


2.6 


Winston-Salem_ 

100.0 

66.1 

62.2 

58.0 

4.2 



3.9 


3.9 


Oklahoma; Tulsa_ 

100.0 

73.2 

70.5 

70.5 



2.7 


2.7 


South Carolina: Charleston... 

100.0 

53.2 

53.2 

53.2 






Tennessee; 

Knoxville__ 

100.0 

77.2 

52.6 

1.6 

51.0 



24.6 


24.6 


22.8 
64 8 

Memphis__ 

100.0 

35.2 

17.3 

17.3 



17.9 


17.9 


Nashville..__ 

100.0 

62.9 

62.9 

62.9 





37.1 

33.3 

3.3 

Texas: 

Dallas_ 

100.0 

66.7 

60.7 

10.5 

50.2 



6.0 


6.0 


El Paso_ 

100.0 

96.7 

96.7 

37.5 

59.2 





Fort Worth__ 

100.0 

88.9 

88.9 

80.0 

8.9 







11.1 

Houston__ 

100.0 

48.0 

40.6 

40.6 




7.4 


7.4 


62.0 

44.8 

San Antonio_ 

100.0 

55.2 

55. 2 

10.2 

45.0 





Virginia: 

Norfolk__ 

100.0 

23.8 

23.0 

23.0 




.8 


.8 


76.2 

Richmond_ 

100.0 

59.3 

56.9 

28.7 

28.2 



2.4 


2.4 


40.7 

Roanoke... _ 

100.0 

58.6 

58.6 

58.6 





41.4 

West Virginia: Huntington... 
Mountain and Pacific 

100.0 

34.0 

24.8 

24.8 




9.2 


9.2 


66.0 








California: 

Los Angeles... _ 

100.0 

90.0 

69.2 

52.2 

17.0 



20.8 

11.5 

5.3 

4.0 

10.0 

Oakland . __ 

100.0 

96.5 

65.4 

46.1 

19.3 



31.1 

13.4 

14.2 

3.6 

3.5 

Sacramento_ _ 

100.0 

89.5 

23.4 

23.4 



66.1 

38.6 

19.9 

7.6 

10.5 

San Diego _ 

100.0 

96.8 

71.9 

31.5 

40.4 



24.9 

17.2 

6.0 

1.7 

3.2 

San Francisco 

100.0 

89.6 

70.9 

3.3 

67.6 



18.7 

7.1 

10.1 

1.6 

10.4 

Colorado* Donvor 

100.0 

48.1 

34.7 

34.7 




13.4 


9.9 

3.6 

51.9 

Oregon; Portland _ 

100.0 

96.3 

93.3 

21.4 

71.9 



3.0 


3.0 

3.7 

TTtah' Salt. T.alrft City 

100.0 

78.1 

68.2 

46.9 

21.3 



9.9 

5.2 

4.7 


21.9 

Washington: 

100.0 

95.1 

89.4 

88.7 

.7 



6.7 

6.7 


4.9 


100.0 

94.3 

81.9 

81.9 




12.4 


12.4 


5.7 









‘ See app. A for the territory included in each urban area. Percentages 
based on figures which relate to territory other than that shown for the area 
in app. A are footnoted. 

1 Figures on which these percentages are based exclude cost of administra¬ 
tion; of materials, equipment, and other items incident to operation of work 
programs; and of transient care. 

> Figures on which these percentages are based include statutory aid to 
veterans administered on basis of need. 


< Not initiated until 1933. 

« Not initiated until 1935. 

* Figures on which these percentages are based include direct and work re¬ 
lief and aid to veterans. 

»Less than 0.1 percent. 

* Figure on which this percentage is based relates to city. 


119 












































































































































































































Table Cr-16.—Percentage distribution of amount of public and private assistance and earnings under specified 

Federal work programs, by urban area, 1933 


Geographic division, State, 
and urban area < 

Total 

public 

and 


General rell 

private 
funds» 

Total 

Total 

Direct 

relief 

Total... 

100.0 

94.6 

75.1 

64.4 

New England 
C onnecticut: 





Bridgeport... 

100.0 

95.1 

80.6 

73.5 

Hartford.... 

100.0 

72.6 

62.2 

61.0 

New Britain. 

100.0 

82.9 

62.5 

62.5 

New Haven_ 

100.0 

85.3 

67.8 

67.4 

Maine: Portland.. 

100.0 

95.6 

71.0 

71.0 

Massachusetts: 




Boston..__ 

100.0 

90.6 

73.1 

73.1 

Brockton. . . 

100.0 

93.6 

71.3 

71.3 

Cambridge.... 

100.0 

90.9 

66. 1 

66.1 

Fall River. 

100.0 

99.7 

68.3 

68.3 

Lawrence_ 

100.0 

97.2 

65.0 

65.0 

Lowell... 

100.0 

95.2 

61.8 

61.8 

Lynn... 

100.0 

97.7 

71.0 

71.0 

Malden__ 

100.0 

99.9 

85.5 

85.5 

New Bedford__ 

100.0 

98.1 

69.7 

69.7 

Newton__ 

100.0 

93.3 

65.8 

65.8 

Springfield.. 

100.0 

97.9 

84.7 

84.7 

Worcester.. . .. 

100.0 

96.7 

77.0 

77.0 

Rhode Island: Providence_ 

100.0 

92.9 

76.3 

39.2 

Middle Atlantic 

New Jersey: 





Jersey City... . . 

•100.0 

•99.1 

•60.3 

•60.3 

Newark_... 

• 100.0 

•98.0 

•76.0 

•69.8 

Trenton.. 

• 100.0 

•95.0 

• 70.2 

•70.2 

New York: 



Albany__ 

• 100.0 

•96.5 

•65.7 

•29.7 

Buffalo.. .. . 

100.0 

96.7 

85.5 

55.9 

New Rochelle_ .. 

• 100.0 

•99.8 

•56.8 

•38.4 

New York.. 

100.0 

87.9 

67.0 

36.2 

Niagara Falls__ 

100.0 

98.5 

83.7 

43.6 

Rochester... 

• loo. 0 

•98.7 

• 75.6 

•43. 1 

Syracuse. 

• loo .0 

•99.1 

•83.2 

•30.9 

Utica. 

100.0 

95.5 

75.2 

30.5 

Yonkers__ . 

100.0 

98.2 

87.4 

34.1 

Pennsylvania: 

Allentown_ 

100.0 

98.5 

87.6 

86.0 

Altoona.. 

100.0 

97.0 

80.1 

76.6 

Bethlehem_ 

100.0 

96.7 

86.2 

84.4 

Chester___ 

100.0 

98.3 

87.6 

84.7 

Erie... 

100.0 

100.0 

89.1 

89.1 

Johnstown__ 

100.0 

99.6 

78.6 

76.6 

Philadelphia. 

100.0 

93.6 

88.8 

88.7 

Pittsburgh.. 

100.0 

97.4 

91.5 

90.7 

Reading__ 

100.0 

98.6 

88.5 

73.7 

Scranton.. 

100.0 

95.8 

83.6 

77.7 

Wilkes-Barre_ 

100.0 

99.5 

88.9 

74.8 

North Central 
Illinois: 





Chicago... 

100.0 

96.2 

86.4 

73.3 

Springfield_ 

100.0 

94.3 

48.5 

41.9 

Indiana: 


Evansville 

100.0 

99.8 

76.8 

68.3 

Fort Wayne_ 

100.0 

93.0 

68.3 

64.3 

Indianapolis__ 

100.0 

94.8 

66.2 

66.1 

South Bend_ .. 

100.0 

99.4 

79.9 

78.7 

Terre Haute.. 

100.0 

96.6 

54.4 

37.0 

Iowa: 


Des Moines_ 

100.0 

98.9 

69.5 

62.4 

Sioux City_ 

100.0 

98.3 

62.6 

38.1 

Kansas: 





Kansas City. 

100.0 

93.8 

64.6 

17.3 

Topeka. 

100.0 

99.7 

66.2 

24.8 

Wichita_ 

100.0 

97.7 

68.5 

22.9 

Michigan: 



Detroit___ 

100.0 

98.9 

78.6 

63.3 

Flint...__ .. 

100.0 

99.6 

75.0 

72.6 

Grand Rapids. 

100.0 

99.6 

79.1 

73.8 

Pontiac... 

100.0 

99.9 

83.5 

80.3 

Saginaw_ 

100.0 

98.0 

65.9 

63.3 

Minnesota: 




Duluth__ 

100.0 

98.7 

67.4 

67.4 

Minneapolis_ 

‘0100.0 

••Ol.O 

*» 65.4 

*0 65.4 

St. Paul_ 

100.0 

92.8 

67.0 

65.2 

Missouri: 




Kansas City_ 

» 100.0 

» 75.4 

** 54.6 

** 54. 2 

St. Louis_ 

10100.0 

*''94.1 

*0 79.0 

>» 79.0 

Nebraska: Omaha. .. 

See footnotes at end of tabk 

100.0 

i . 

90.1 

62.2 

62.2 


Public funds 


Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 


Special types of public assistance 


Private 


Work 

relief 


20.7 


7.1 

1.2 


10.4 


36.1 


* 6.2 


•36.0 

29.6 
«18.4 

30.8 

40.2 
•32.5 
•52.3 

44.7 

53.3 

1.6 

3.5 

1.8 

2.9 


2.0 
. 1 
.8 
14.8 
5.8 
14.1 


13.1 

6.6 

8.6 

14.0 

.1 

1.2 

17.4 

7.1 

24.6 

37.2 

41.4 

46.6 

15.3 
2.4 
5.3 

3.2 

2.6 


(7 10) 
1.8 

>'.4 

(7 10) 


Civil 
Works 
Pro¬ 
gram ‘ 

Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA • 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

children 

Aid to 
the 
blind 

funds » 

11.5 


7.9 

2.8 

4.6 

0.6 

5.6 

11.3 


3.2 


3.1 

.1 

4.9 

6.1 


5.2 


6.0 

.2 

27.5 

15.2 


6.2 


6.2 

(0 

17.1 

9.9 


7.6 


7.4 

.2 

14.7 

21.6 


3.0 


2.1 

.9 

4.5 

3.4 


14.0 

7.2 

6.5 

.3 

9.5 

6.2 


16.1 

9.8 

6.7 

.6 

6.4 

9.3 


15.5 

8.9 

6.8 

.8 

9.1 

12.0 


19.4 

12.8 

5.8 

.8 

.3 

10.4 


21.8 

13.9 

7.6 

.4 

2.8 

13.2 


20.2 

10.4 

9.3 

.5 

4.8 

9.1 


17.6 

13.4 

4.0 

.2 

2.3 

6.3 


8.1 

6.8 

1.1 

.2 

. 1 

8.5 


19.9 

13.6 

6.0 

.4 

1.9 

13.5 


14.0 

8.6 

5.0 

.4 

6. 7 

6.9 


6.3 

4.9 

1.3 

.1 

2. 1 

9.7 


10.0 

6.3 

3.4 

.3 

3.3 

13.7 


3.9 


3.9 


7.1 

•30.4 


•8.4 


•8.1 

•.3 

•.9 

•7.9 


•14.1 

•3.1 

• 10.7 

•.3 

•2.0 

• 11.9 


« 12.9 

•6.0 

•7.4 

«.5 

•5.0 

•22.6 


•8.3 

•5.0 

•2.9 

•.4 

•3.5 

5.3 


5.9 

3.3 

2.4 

.2 

3.3 

•39.7 


•3.3 

•2.2 

• 1.0 

•.1 

•.2 

6.1 


14.8 

6.4 

8.2 

.2 

12.1 

8. 1 


6.7 

2.2 

4.4 

.1 

1.5 

• 11.2 


• 11.9 

•9.2 

•2.6 

«.2 

• 1.3 

•9.6 


•6.3 

•4.8 

• 1.4 

•.1 

•.9 

6.2 


14.1 

7.8 

6.0 

.3 

4.5 

3.6 


7.2 

3.4 

3.7 

.1 

1.8 

5.7 


5.2 


5. 2 


1. 5 

11.0 


5.9 


6.9 


3.0 

6.2 


4.3 


4.3 


3.3 

6.6 


5.1 


5.1 


1.7 

4.4 


6. 5 


6. 5 


(0 

7.0 


14.0 


14.0 


.4 

1.1 


3.6 


3.6 


6.6 

2.1 


3.8 


3.8 


2.6 

5.8 


4.3 


4. 3 


1.4 

8.7 


3.6 


3.6 


4.2 

3.3 


7.3 


7.3 


.6 

7.6 


2.2 


1.4 

.8 

3.8 

35.0 


10.8 


1 4 

9.4 

6.7 

21.9 


1.1 


1.1 

.2 

23.8 


.9 


.9 


7.0 

28.1 


.5 


. 6 


6.2 

17.6 


1.9 


1.9 


.6 

40.7 


1.6 


1.6 


3.4 

25.4 


4.0 


2.6 

1.4 

1.1 

29.5 


6.2 


4 8 

1.4 

1. 7 

39.2 


. 1 


. 1 

6. 2 

31.1 


2.4 


2.4 


.3 

28.0 


1.2 


1.2 


2.3 

14.7 


6.6 


6.6 


11 

14.2 


10.3 


10.3 


. 6 

16.4 


4.1 


4.1 


4 

15.0 


1 4 


1.4 


. 1 

18.6 


13.5 


13.6 


2.0 

16.7 


14.6 

3.2 

11.0 

0.4 

1.3 

>« 15.5 


*010.1 

* 04.4 

*0 6.4 

*‘>.3 

*» 9.0 

16.4 


9.4 

3.4 

5.6 

.4 

7.2 

» 14.1 


•* 6.7 


** 1. 7 

u fi (1 

11 94 Q 

*0 11.8 


* 03.3 


10 7 

10 9 fi 

10 5 ' 9 

21.9 


6.0 


5.1 

.0 

9 '9 


120 




















































































































































































































































Table Percentage distribution of amount of public and private assistance and earnings under specified 

Federal work programs, by urban area, 1933—Continued 


Public funds 


Geographic division. State, 
and urban area > 

Total 
public 
and 
private 
funds * 



Total 

General relief * 

Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 

Special types of public assistance 

Total 

Direct 

relief 

Work 

relief 

Civil 
Works 
Pro¬ 
gram * 

Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA« 

Total 

Old-age 

assit- 

ance 

Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

children 

Aid to 
the 
blind 

North Central— Continued 












Ohio: 












Akron_ 

100.0 

97.9 

73.0 

62.1 

10.9 

22 . 


2 4 




Canton_ 

100.0 

100.0 

72.4 

72.3 

. 1 

20, 1 


7 5 



0. 4 

Cincinnati.... 

100.0 

96.8 

74.4 

40.2 

34. 2 

17. 5 


4 9 



o. 9 

Cleveland_ 

100.0 

95.3 

70.6 

67.3 

3.3 

20. 3 


4 4 




Columbus... 

100.0 

97.7 

72.7 

30.1 

42.6 

20 2 


iis 




Dayton__ _ 

100.0 

96.7 

74.8 

69.6 

15. 2 

1 


3 8 




Springfield_ .. 

100.0 

99.0 

59.8 

58.8 

1.0 

36. 4 


2 ^ 




Toledo.. 

100.0 

99.8 

65.9 

63.4 

2. 5 

.30 0 


3 9 




Youngstown_ 

Wisconsin: 

100.0 

98. 7 

72.9 

71.3 

1.6 

23.1 


2.7 


1.8 

• 8 

.9 

Kenosha_ 

100.0 

99.3 

72.2 

71.1 

1. 1 

1^ 5 



2.3 



Madison_ 

100.0 

99.8 

65.7 

47.6 

8.2 



5 6 

0. 0 

. 7 

Milwaukee_ 

100.0 

98.1 

71.6 

54. 6 

17 1 

17 fi 


8 9 

2.1 



Racine. 

100.0 

99.6 

78.1 

75.6 

2. 6 

14.7 


6.7 

6.8 

.9 

South Atlantic and 








South Central 












Alabama: 












Birmingham.. 

100.0 

98.1 

72.1 

36.1 

36.0 

26.0 






Mobile_ 

100.0 

100.0 

77.6 

19.1 

58.5 

22.4 






Delaware: Wilmington 

100.0 

86.9 

78.6 

61.2 

17.4 

1.8 


6.5 

3. 9 

2.6 


District of Columbia: Wash- 











ington_ 

100.0 

91.6 

62.7 

17.2 

45.5 

24.8 


4.0 


4.0 


Florida: 











Jacksonville_ 

100.0 

99.4 

67.8 

14.6 

63.2 

29.3 


2.3 


2. 3 


Miami... 

100.0 

97.6 

69.8 

8.6 

61.3 

23. 7 


4.1 


Al 


Georgia: Atlanta . _ 

100.0 

96.9 

71.8 

44.7 

27.1 

25.1 




Kentucky: Louisville 
Louisiana: 

100.0 

92.7 

i» 72.1 

” 16. 3 

» 55. 8 

13.2 


7.4 

.7 

4.9 

» 1.8 

New Orleans_ 

100.0 

97.6 

70.7 

10.0 

60.7 

26.7 


.2 




Shreveport.. 

100.0 

97.7 

66.9 

1.6 

65.3 

39.3 


1. 6 


5 

9 

Maryland: Baltimore_ 

100.0 

96.8 

87.5 

60.3 

37.2 

6.1 


2. 2 

. 6 

.9 

7 

North Carolina: 











Asheville__ 

100.0 

98.0 

70.8 

31.8 

39.0 

26.8 


.4 


4 


Charlotte 

100.0 

99.0 

80.0 

52.9 

27.1 

18.3 


.7 


7 


Greensboro 

100.0 

99.7 

80.1 

61.0 

19.1 

19.0 


.6 


6 


Winston-Salem 

100.0 

94.2 

76.0 

48.6 

27.4 

17.5 


.7 


.7 


Oklahoma: Tulsa 

100.0 

98.3 

68.3 

43.4 

24.9 

29.4 


.6 


. 6 


South Carolina: Charleston... 

100.0 

98.5 

62.9 

15.4 

47.6 

35.6 






Tennessee: 












Knoxville 

100.0 

98.5 

41.8 

9.6 

32.3 

61.2 


6.6 


5 6 


Memphis.. . 

100.0 

90.7 

69.4 

3.4 

66.0 

28.8 


2. 6 


2.6 


Nashville 

100.0 

90.8 

64.7 

29.9 

24.8 

36.1 





Texas: 












Dallas... 

100.0 

97.3 

77.0 

26.0 

61.0 

19.3 


1. 0 


1.0 


El Paso . 

100.0 

98.3 

60.5 

24.2 

36.3 

37.8 





Fort Worth. 

100.0 

99.2 

60. 1 

33.3 

26.8 

39.1 






Houston 

100.0 

99.2 

68.0 

68.5 

9.5 

30.0 


1.2 


1.2 


San Antonio_ 

100.0 

98.4 

65.6 

26.7 

38.8 

32.9 





Virginia: 












Norfolk 

100.0 

92.9 

56.1 

12.0 

44.1 

36.2 


.6 


.6 


Richmond. .. . 

100.0 

77.6 

52.5 

26.9 

25.6 

23.9 


1.2 


1. 2 


Roanoke_ 

100.0 

89.0 

74.5 

74.5 


14.6 






West Virginia: Huntington... 

100.0 

96.8 

84.1 

19.6 

64.6 

12.7 




(0 


Mountain and PAaric 











California: 












Los Angeles_ 

100.0 

98.0 

76.0 

24.6 

51.4 

12.4 


9.6 

6.2 

2.4 

2.0 

Oakland__ 

100.0 

98.6 

60.8 

52.2 

8.6 

16.4 


21.4 

10.2 

8.6 

2. 6 

Sacramento._ 

100.0 

97.5 

30.4 

30.4 


26.4 


40.7 

23.0 

13.1 

' 4.6 

San Diego_ 

100.0 

98.8 

50.3 

29.6 

20.7 

29.3 


19.2 

12.8 

5.1 

1. 3 

San Francisco 

100.0 

97.0 

69.0 

26.6 

42.4 

15.5 


12. 5 

4.9 

6.5 

1.1 

Colorado: Denver_ _ 

100.0 

97.2 

7.3.5 

73.5 


15.6 


8.1 

3.4 

3.4 

1.3 

Ores-on: Portland 

100.0 

99.3 

87.1 

44.4 

42.7 

9.9 


2.3 


2.3 


TJtah; Salt Lake City 

100.0 

96.4 

75.3 

61.3 

14.0 

17.5 


3.6 

1.8 

1.8 


Washineton: 












Seattle 

100.0 

98.7 

80.8 

78.9 

1.9 

15.8 


2.1 


2.1 


Tacoma 

100.0 

99.8 

74.9 

72.1 

2.8 

19.4 


6.6 


5.6 















Private 
funds • 


(0 


2.1 

3.2 
4.7 

2.3 

3.3 

1.0 

.2 

1.3 


.7 

.2 

1.9 

.5 


1.9 


(») 


13.1 

8.6 


.6 

2.4 

3.1 

>«7.3 


2.4 

2.3 

4.2 


2.0 

1.0 

.3 

6.8 

1.7 

1.6 

1.6 

9.3 

9.2 

2.7 

1.7 
.8 
.8 

1.6 

7.1 
22.4 
11.0 

3.2 


2.0 

1.4 

2.5 
1.2 
3.0 
2.8 

.7 

3.6 

1.3 

.2 


• See app. A for the territory included in each urban area. Percentages 
based on figures which relate to territory other than that shown for the area 
in app. A are footnoted. The entire percentage distribution is footnoted when 
the difference in coverage applies to earnings under one of the Federal work 
programs. 

• Figures on which these percentages are based exclude cost of administra¬ 
tion; of materials, equipment, and other items incident to operation of work 
programs; and of transient care. 

• Figures on which these percentages are based include statutory aid to 
veterans administered on basis of need. 

< Figures from the WPA, Division of Statistics, on which these percentages 
are based represent earnings of all persons employed under the program, 
including the administrative staff. 

‘ Not initiated until 1936. 


« Figures on which these percentages are based include direct and work 
relief and aid to veterans. 

’ Less than 0.1 percent. 

* The percentage distribution is distorted to an unknown extent because 
figure for Civil Works Program relates to county. 

* The percentage distribution is distorted to an unknown extent because 
figure for Civil Works Program relates to county exclusive of Yonkers. 

‘'I The percentage distribution is distorted to an unknown extent because 
figure for Civil Works Program relates to city. 

The percentage distribution is distorted to an unknown extent because 
figures for Civil Works Program, public general relief, and private relief 
relate to city. 

•* Figure on which this percentage is based relates to city. 


121 

































































































































































































Table C-17 .—Percentage distribution of amount of public and private assistance and earnings under specified 

Federal work programs, by urban area, 1934 


Geographic division, State, 
and urban area i 


Total.. 

New England 
Connecticut: 

Bridgeport. 

Hartford. 

New Britain_ 

New Haven...__ 

Maine: Portland.... 

Massachusetts: 

Boston... 

Brockton_ 

Cambridge. 

Fall River_ 

Lawrence_ 

Lowell__ 

Lynn.. 

Malden_ 

New Bedford_ 

Newton_ 

Springfield. 

Worcester.. 

Rhode Island: Providence_ 

Middle Atlantic 
New Jersey: 

Jersey City. 

Newark..__ 

Trenton____ 

New York: 

Albany___ 

Buffalo_ 

New Rochelle__ 

New York...__ 

Niagara Falls_ 

Rochester__ 

Syracuse__ 

Utica... 

Yonkers__ 

Pennsylvania: 

Allentown__ 

Altoona___ 

Bethlehem_ 

Chester_ 

Erie_ 

Johnstown__ 

Philadelphia.. 

Pittsburgh_ 

Reading__ 

Scranton_ 

Wilkes-Barre..... 

North Central 
Hlinois: 

Chicago___ 

Springfield.... 

Indiana: 

Evansville_ 

Fort Wayne... 

Indianapolis_ 

South Bend. 

Terre Haute.. 

Iowa: 

Des Moines_ 

Sioux City__ 

Kansas: 

Kansas City__ 

Topeka.. 

Wichita___ 

Michigan: 

Detroit. 

Flint_ 

Grand Rapids. 

Pontiac.. 

Saginaw__ 

Minnesota: 

Duluth. 

Minneapolis_ 

St. Paul. 

Missouri: 

Kansas City. 

St. Louis. 


Total 
public 
and 
private 
funds > 

Public funds 

Private 
funds * 

Total 

General relief * 

Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 

Special types of public assistance 

Total 

Direct 

relief 

Work 

relief 

Civil 
Works 
Pro¬ 
gram * 

Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA * 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

children 

Aid to 
the 
blind 

100.0 

98.2 

67.1 

43.8 

23.3 

26.2 


4.9 

1.9 

2.7 

0.3 

1.8 

100.0 

98.0 

70.0 

31.8 

38. 2 

25. 8 


2.2 


2.2 

(0 

2.0 

100.0 

89.8 

67.0 

43.5 

23.5 

19. 2 


3.6 


3.4 

. 2 

10.2 

100.0 

90.6 

69.1 

37.8 

31.3 

26.6 


3.9 


3.9 

(1) 

.4 

100.0 

94.4 

63.0 

39.9 

23.1 

26.6 


4.8 


4.6 

.2 

5.6. 

100.0 

98.2 

52.8 

27.8 

25.0 

43.5 


1.9 


1.4 

.5 

1.8 

100.0 

96.4 

71.8 

45.5 

26.3 

13.8 


10.8 

5.6 

5.0 

.3 

3.6 

100.0 

96.4 

71.4 

33.5 

37.9 

15.3 


9.7 

6.1 

3.2 

.4 

3.6 

100.0 

97.2 

67.0 

30.3 

36.7 

19.2 


11.0 

6.2 

4.2 

.6 

2.8 

100.0 

99.9 

62.2 

24.7 

37.5 

27.3 


10. 4 

7.1 

2.8 

.5 

.1 

100.0 

99. 1 

74.2 

23.6 

60. 6 

15.9 


9.0 

5.6 

3.2 

.2 

.9 

100.0 

97.8 

72.0 

34.5 

37.6 

13.6 


12. 2 

6.5 

5. 4 

.3 

2.2 

100.0 

98.5 

68.5 

27.6 

40.9 

17.5 


12.5 

9.6 

2.8 

.1 

1.5 

100.0 

99.9 

81.9 

38.8 

43.1 

11.9 


6.1 

5.2 

.7 

.2 

. 1 

100.0 

98.9 

66. 4 

25.7 

40.7 

19.7 


12.8 

9.6 

3.0 

.2 

1.1 

100.0 

97.8 

63.4 

25.2 

38.2 

24.6 


9.8 

6.3 

3.2 

.3 

2.2 

100.0 

98.3 

75.4 

43.4 

32.0 

16.7 


6.2 

5.0 

1.1 

.1 

1.7 

100.0 

98.1 

67.5 

32.5 

35.0 

23.0 


7.6 

4.5 

2.9 

.2 

1.9 

100.0 

97.2 

68.7 

19.1 

49.6 

25.0 


3.6 


3.5 


2.8 

«100.0 

»99.8 

*46.4 

*40.9 

*6.6 

*50.0 


*3.4 

*.3 

*3.0 

».l 

*.2 

»100.0 

*99.4 

*64.7 

* 56.3 

*8.4 

*28.6 


*6.1 

» 1.5 

* 4.5 

*.l 

*.6 

« 100. 0 

*98.7 

* 56.3 

*49.9 

*6.4 

*36.0 


*6.4 

*2.8 

*3.4 

*.2 

*1.3 

»100.0 

*98.6 

*47.6 

» 18.3 

*29.3 

*46.6 


* 4.4 

*2.7 

» 1.5 

*.2 

* 1.4 

100.0 

99.0 

74.8 

38.4 

36.4 

20.7 


3.5 

1.7 

1.7 

.1 

1.0 

• 100. 0 

•99.9 

•34.2 

» 17.7 

• 16.5 

•64.2 


• 1.5 

• 1.1 

». 4 

0 (!) 

•. 1 

100.0 

97.1 

72.0 

41.3 

30.7 

16.6 


8.5 

3.5 

4.9 

.1 

2.9 

100.0 

99.5 

67.5 

21.7 

45.8 

28.2 


3.8 

1.2 

2.6 

(1) 

.5 

« 100. 0 

*99.1 

* 64.8 

*42.1 

« 22.7 

*28.3 


*6.0 

* 4.1 

* 1.8 

*.1 

0.9 

e 100.0 

*99.2 

* 63.3 

*30.2 

*33.1 

*31.7 


*4.2 

*3.1 

« 1.0 

*. 1 

*.8 

100.0 

97.7 

60.4 

36.5 

23.9 

25.9 


11.4 

6.2 

5.0 

.2 

2 3 

100.0 

98.7 

81.2 

37.5 

43.7 

10.7 


6.8 

3.3 

3.4 

.1 

1.3 

100.0 

99.7 

70.5 

56.5 

14.0 

2.5.9 


3.3 

.4 

2.4 

.6 

.3 

100.0 

99.0 

62.6 

47.3 

15.3 

32.2 

. 

4.2 

.5 

3.4 

.3 

1.0 

100.0 

99.4 

65.9 

52.7 

13.2 

31.0 


2. 5 

.4 

2.0 

.1 

.6 

100.0 

99.5 

72.4 

59.0 

13.4 

23.7 


3.4 

.6 

2.4 

.4 

.5 

100.0 

100.0 

69.9 

54. 3 

15.6 

26.3 


3.8 

.5 

2.8 

.5 

(0 

100.0 

99.9 

67.2 

62.9 

14.3 

28.1 


4.6 

.5 

3 6 

.5 

. 1 

100.0 

97.5 

83.0 

72.2 

10.8 

11.5 


3.0 

.4 

2.1 

. 5 

2 5 

100.0 

99.0 

81.7 

72. 4 

9.3 

14.6 


2.7 

.3 

2.1 

.3 

1.0 

100.0 

99. 1 

67.1 

49.5 

17.6 

28.0 


4.0 

.4 

3 1 

. 5 

.9 

100.0 

99.1 

73.6 

59.5 

14.1 

23.5 


2.0 

.3 

1. 4 

.3 

.9 

100.0 

99.7 

76.6 

68.7 

7.9 

19.1 


4.0 

.4 

3.2 

,4 

.3 

100.0 

98.0 

64.8 

49.7 

15.1 

31.7 


1.5 


1 0 


2 0 

100.0 

98.7 

54.7 

41.6 

13.1 

41.9 


2.1 


.6 

1.6 

1 3 

100.0 

99.9 

67.9 

28.1 

39.8 

28.2 


3.8 

3.3 

.5 

. 1 

100.0 

98.5 

61.5 

33.0 

28.5 

34.8 


2.2 

1.5 

.7 


1 •> 

100.0 

98.4 

63.3 

23.3 

40.0 

33.6 


1.6 

1. 2 

. 4 


1. 6 

100.0 

99.7 

55.7 

30.6 

25.1 

37.3 


6.7 

5.3 

1.4 


. 3 

100.0 

99.1 

55.4 

14.0 

41.4 

39.3 


4.4 

3.8 

.6 


.9 

100.0 

99.7 

54.9 

39.3 

15.6 

42.4 


2.4 

.2 

1.4 

. 8 

. 3 

100.0 

99.2 

40.0 

28.9 

11.1 

54.6 


4.6 

.2 

3.4 

1.0 

.8 

100.0 

99.4 

63.1 

8.6 

54.5 

36.3 


(0 


(1) 


.6 

100.0 

99.5 

58.3 

12.3 

46.0 

40.2 


1.0 


1.0 


5 

100.0 

99.5 

62.5 

18. 2 

44.3 

36.7 


.3 


. 3 


5 

100.0 

99.4 

63.8 

35.7 

28.1 

31.6 


4.0 

.1 

3.9 


. 6 

100.0 

99.7 

55.5 

45.0 

10.5 

39.4 


4.8 

. 1 

4.7 


3 

100.0 

99.8 

70.5 

61.8 

18.7 

26.9 


2.4 

. 1 

2.3 


2 

100.0 

99.9 

66.8 

49.7 

17. 1 

33.0 


.1 

.1 



1 

100.0 

98.2 

49.0 

39.0 

10.0 

39.9 


9.3 

.4 

8.9 


1 R 

100.0 

99.0 

55.4 

32.9 

22.5 

36.1 


7.5 

2.0 

5 3 


1 0 

100.0 

>* 96.8 

i» 60. 6 

i* 37.0 

10 23.6 

10 30. 8 


10 5.4 

10 2. 5 

10 2.8 

10 1 

10 3 9. 

100.0 

97.9 

62.7 

32.9 

29.8 

31.3 

r - 

3.9 

1.5 

2.2 

.2 

2. 1 

» 100. 0 

11 92. 5 

11 54. 4 

11 35. 0 

‘1 19. 4 

» 34. 3 1 


11 3.8 


11 9 

” ? P 

u 7^ 

‘1100. 0 

i* 97. 3 

l« 65.1 

10 64.4 

i»10.7 ‘ 

10 30. 6 


101.6 


10,3 

10 L3 

10 2 ! 7 


See footnotes at end of table. 


122 

















































































































































































Table C-ll.—Percentage distribution of amount of public and private assistance and earnings under specified 

Federal work programs, by urban area, 1934 —Continued 


Geographic division, State, 


Total 

public 

and 


Public funds 


General relief * 



private 
funds 2 

Total 

Total 

Direct 

relief 

Work 

relief 

Civil 
Works 
Pro¬ 
gram < 

North Central —Con. 







Nebraska: Omaha_ 

100.0 

95.9 

65.2 

40.2 

25.0 

29.4 

Ohio: 







Akron_ . 

100.0 

99.4 

58.1 

40.5 

17.6 

39.3 

Canton_ 

100.0 

100.0 

59.7 

40.4 

19.3 

35.3 

Cincinnati_ 

100.0 

98.0 

61.3 

44.4 

16.9 

32.7 

Cleveland__ 

100.0 

98.4 

66.1 

54.9 

11.2 

29.5 

Columbus__ 

100.0 

99.3 

61.9 

38.4 

23.5 

33.2 

Dayton__ 

100.0 

98.8 

62.5 

46.6 

15.9 

33.3 

Springfield__ 

100.0 

99.0 

50.0 

31.3 

18.7 

46.8 

Toledo___ 

100.0 

100.0 

60.0 

44.3 

15.7 

37.6 

Youngstown... 

100.0 

99.8 

56.2 

43.1 

13.1 

42.0 

Wisconsin: 





27.2 

22.0 

Kenosha_ _ 

100.0 

99.7 

73.7 

46.5 

Madison_-. _ 

100.0 

99.9 

62.3 

29.2 

23.1 

44.4 

Milwaukee_ 

100.0 

99.0 

58.3 

33.1 

25.2 

35.5 

Racine___ 

100.0 

99.6 

66.1 

54.6 

11.6 

28.6 

South Atlantic and 
South Central 

Alabama: 





29.6 

34.0 

Birmingham_ 

100.0 

100.0 

66.0 

36.4 

Mobile_ - _ 

100.0 

100.0 

64.5 

43.2 

21.3 

35.5 

Delaware: Wilmington_ 

100.0 

96.7 

71.2 

70.7 

.5 

17.1 

District of Columbia: Wash- 





28.1 

32.8 

ington__ __ 

100.0 

98.4 

64.1 

36.0 

Florida: 





32.6 

40.4 

Jacksonville_ 

100.0 

99.7 

57.4 

24.8 

Miami__ 

100.0 

98.2 

55.2 

14.3 

40.9 

40.4 

Georgia: Atlanta__ 

100.0 

99.4 

70.3 

48.9 

21.4 

29.1 

Kentucky: Louisville.- - 

100.0 

93.6 

n 45. 5 

» 16.3 

« 29. 2 

45.0 

Louisiana: 




19.9 

44.6 

33.9 

New Orleans_ 

100.0 

98.5 

64.5 

Shreveport- - 

100.0 

97.6 

38.9 

8.2 

30.7 

57.6 

Maryland: Baltimore—- 

100.0 

99.3 

81.1 

72.8 

8.3 

16.8 

North Carolina: 





23.8 

35.9 

Asheville.. __ 

100.0 

100.0 

64.0 

40.2 

Charlotte___- 

100.0 

95.0 

47.8 

25.3 

22.5 

46.9 

Greensboro__ 

100.0 

99.7 

62.6 

32.7 

29.9 

36.8 

Winston-Salem... .. 

100.0 

96.7 

57.7 

31.6 

26.1 

38.6 

Oklahoma: Tulsa.__ 

100.0 

96.2 

38.7 

9.9 

28.8 

57.0 

South Carolina: Charleston... 

100.0 

99.2 

54.3 

16.1 

38.2 

44.9 

Tennessee: 




32.7 

14.7 

50.4 

Knoxville__-- 

100.0 

99.6 

47.4 

Memphis___ 

100.0 

98.4 

54.7 

27.7 

27.0 

41.9 

Nashville.-- - 

100.0 

98.4 

55.5 

35.6 

19.9 

42.9 

Texas: 

Dallas__ 

100.0 

98.4 

68.5 

40.8 

17.7 

39.2 

El Paso____- 

100.0 

99.9 

44.6 

21.1 

23.5 

55. 3 

Fort Worth--- 

100.0 

99.8 

64.3 

29.7 

34.6 

35. 5 

Houston__ 

100.0 

99.6 

60.8 

41.4 

19.4 

38. 2 

San Antonio__ 

100.0 

99.6 

56.0 

30.1 

25.9 

43.6 

Virginia; 

Norfolk__ 

100.0 

98.9 

50.0 

24.4 

25.6 

48.6 

Richmond- - 

100.0 

92.9 

39.3 

25.4 

13.9 

52.9 

Roanoke__ 

100.0 

97.6 

58.0 

31.1 

26.9 

39.6 

West Virginia: Huntington... 

100.0 

99.6 

61.4 

28.6 

32.8 

38. 2 

Mountain and Pacieic 







California: 

Los .4.ngeles ___ 

100.0 

99.2 

68.2 

43.6 

24.6 

24.3 

Oakland- ___ 

100.0 

99.3 

58.8 

32.7 

26.1 

27.4 

Sacramento. _ 

100.0 

98.3 

35.0 

10.9 

24.1 

42.3 

San Diego___ 

San Francisco_ 

100.0 

99.7 

63.1 

23. 7 

39.4 

29. 5 

100.0 

97.7 

61.7 

38.2 

23.5 

28. 6 

Colorado: Denver.. .- 

100.0 

99.6 

65.9 

37. 7 

28. 2 

25. 8 

Oregon: Portland_ .. 

100.0 

99.7 

66.5 

42. 5 

24. 0 

29. 5 

Utah: Salt Lake City- 

100.0 

97.7 

69. 5 

39. 2 

30. 3 

26. 6 

Washington: 

100.0 

99.3 

69.0 

42.8 

16.2 

38.1 

Tacoma_ 

100.0 

100.0 

63.0 

52.1 

10.9 

32.4 


Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 


Special types of public assistance 


Private 


Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA» 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

children 

Aid to 
the 
blind 



1.3 


1.1 

0.2 

4.1 


2.0 

0.7 

1.1 

.2 

.6 


4.4 

1.1 

1.8 

1.5 

(') 


4.0 

1.3 

2.2 

.5 

2.0 


2.8 

. 4 

2.1 

.3 

1.6 


4.2 

1.0 

2.2 

1.0 

.7 


3.0 

.7 

1.7 

.6 

1.2 


2.2 

.9 

1.0 

.3 

1.0 


2.4 

.8 

1.3 

.3 

(0 


1.6 

.4 

.8 

.4 

.2 


4.0 

1.3 

2.2 

.5 

.3 


3.2 


2.6 

.6 

1 


5.2 

1.3 

3.5 

.4 

lio 


4.9 


4.2 

.7 

, 4 






C) 







8.4 

5.2 

3.2 


3 . 3 


1.5 


1.5 


1 6 


1.9 


1.9 


. 3 


2.6 


2.6 


1.8 






6 


3.1 

(0 

3.0 

12 .1 

>2 6.4 


. 1 



. 1 

1. 5 


1.1 


.4 

.7 

2. 4 


1.4 

.3 

.6 

.5 

.7 


. 1 


. 1 




.3 


.3 


5.0 


.3 


.3 


. 3 




.4 


3.3 


. 5 


.5 


3 . 8 






.8 


1.8 


1.8 


. 4 


1.8 


1.8 


1.6 






1.6 


.7 


.7 


1.6 






. 1 








.6 


.6 


.4 






.4 


.3 


.3 


1.1 


. 7 


.7 


7.1 






2.4 






.4 


6.7 

3.5 

1.8 

1.4 

.8 


13.1 

6.8 

4.6 

1.7 

.7 


21.0 

11.3 

7.3 

2.4 

1.7 


7.1 

5.0 

1.6 

.5 

.3 


7.4 

3.2 

3.5 

.7 

2.3 


7.9 

6.0 

1.4 

.5 

.4 


3. 7 

2.5 

1.2 


.3 


1.6 

.8 

.8 


2.3 


2.2 

.4 

1.3 

.5 

.7 


4. 6 

1.6 

3.0 










> See app. A for the territory included in each urban area. Percentages 
based on figures which relate to territory other than that shown for the area 
in app. A are footnoted. The entire percentage distribution is footnoted when 
the difference in coverage applies to earnings under one of the Federal work 

^Tpi^res on which these percentages are based exclude cost of administra¬ 
tion; of materials, equipment, and other items incident to operation of work 
proerams; and of transient care. ^ , 4 . * * 

* Figures on which these percentages are -based include statutory aid to 
veterans administered on basis of need. 

< Fieuresfrom the WPA, Division of Statistics, on which these percentages 
are based represent earnings of all persons employed under the program, in¬ 
cluding the administrative staff. 

• Not initiated until 1935. 


9 Figures on which these percentages are based include direct and work 

relief and aid to veterans. 

1 Less than 0.1 percent. ^ v 

* The percentage distribution is distorted to an unknown extent because 
figure for Civil Works Program relates to county. 

* The percentage distribution is distorted to an unknown extent because 
figure for Civil Works Program relates to county exclusive of Yonkers. 

>0 The percentage distribution is distorted to an unknown extent because 
figure for Civil Works Program relates to city. 

'• The percentage distribution is distorted to an unknown extent because 
figures for Civil Works Program, public general relief, and private relief 
to city. 

>9 Figure on which this percentage is based relates to city. 


452436°—42- 


-9 


123 






















































































































































































Table C—18.—Percentage distribution of amount of public and private assistance and earnings under specified 

Federal work programs, by urban area, 1935 


Geographic division, State, 
and urban area • 

Total 
public 
and 
private 
funds 5 

Public funds 

Private 
funds ‘ 

Total 

General relief' 

Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 

Special types of public assistance 

Total 

Direct 

relief 

Work 

relief 

Civil 
Works 
Pro¬ 
gram < 

Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA « 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

children 

Aid to 
the 
blind 

Total.. .. 

100.0 

98.7 

78.1 

54 . 2 

23.9 


14.5 

6.1 

3 . 2 

2.5 

0.4 

1.3 

New England 













Connecticut: 













Bridgeport.. 

7100 . 0 

' 98.4 

' 77.1 

' 16.6 

' 60 . 5 


' 19.1 

' 2.2 


' 2.1 

'. 1 

' 1.6 

Hartford... 

100.0 

93 . 1 

80 . 2 

41.2 

39.0 


9.9 

3.0 


2.8 

. 2 

6.9 

New Britain_ 

100 . 0 

99 . 8 

86 . 2 

34 . 9 

51.3 


10.8 

2 . 8 


2.8 

(*) 

.2 

New Haven_ 

’ 100.0 

' 96 . 3 

' 66.7 

' 39.9 

' 26.8 


' 25.7 

' 3.9 


' 3.8 

'. 1 

' 3.7 

Maine: Portland__ 

' 100.0 

' 97 . 2 

' 84.3 

' 35.3 

' 49 . 0 


' 10.6 

^ 2 3 


' 1.7 

'.6 

' 2.8 

Massachusetts: 













Boston 

100 . 0 

96.9 

82 . 3 

31 . 5 

50.8 


5.1 

9 . 5 

4.9 

4.4 

.2 

3.1 

Brockton_ 

100.0 

97.0 

82.9 

25.2 

57.7 


4.9 

9.2 

6.6 

2.3 

.3 

3.0 

Cambridge.. _ 

100 . 0 

97.9 

83.1 

32.0 

51.1 


5.5 

9.3 

5.5 

3.3 

.5 

2.1 

Fall River_ 

100.0 

99 . 9 

84.1 

32 . 7 

51.4 


7 . 4 

8.4 

5.9 

2.1 

.4 

. 1 

Lawrence_ 

100.0 

99.2 

84.6 

15 . 2 

69.4 


4.8 

9.8 

6.6 

3.0 

.2 

.8 

Lowell_ 

100.0 

98.5 

81.9 

28 . 5 

53.4 


6.0 

10.6 

6.2 

4 . 1 

.3 

1.5 

Lynn_ 

100.0 

98.6 

82.2 

30.1 

52.1 


2 . 2 

14.2 

10.9 

3.2 

.1 

1.4 

Malden_ 

100.0 

99.9 

87.1 

26.1 

61 . 0 


6 . 0 

6.8 

4.7 

1.9 

.2 

. 1 

New Bedford_ 

100.0 

99 . 2 

80.8 

24.0 

56 . 8 


5.8 

12.6 

9.9 

2.5 

.2 

.8 

Newton __ 

100.0 

97.4 

81.6 

33.9 

47 . 7 


3 . 6 

12.2 

7 . 7 

4.3 

.2 

2.6 

Springfield._ 

100.0 

98.7 

89.0 

50.8 

38.2 


3.4 

6.3 

5.3 

.9 

. 1 

1.3 

Worcester__ 

100.0 

98.4 

86.1 

41.3 

44.8 


3.9 

8.4 

5.1 

3.1 

.2 

1.6 

Rhode Island! Providence 

7100.0 

' 98.1 

' 71.9 

' 19.6 

'• 52 . 3 


' 23.0 

' 3 . 2 

'.2 

' 3 . 0 


' 1 . 9 

Middle Atlantic 













New Jersey: 













Jersey City_ 

7 100 . 0 

' 99.8 

' 69.5 

' 67.8 

' 1.7 


' 24.3 

' 6.0 

' 2.3 

' 3.6 

'.1 

'.2 

Newark_ 

’’ 100 . 0 

' 99.4 

' 77.2 

' 75.1 

' 2.1 


' 14.4 

' 7.8 

' 2.2 

' 5.5 

'.1 

'.6 

Trenton _ 

? 100.0 

' 99.6 

' 78.1 

' 78.1 



' 14.4 

' 7.1 

' 3.1 

' 3.7 

7 ^ 

'.4 

New York: 













Albany__ 

7 100 . 0 

' 98.5 

' 75.4 

' 31.9 

' 43 . 5 


' 17.0 

' 6.1 

' 3.8 

' 2.0 

'.3 

' 1.5 

Buffalo_ 

100 . 0 

99.2 

86 . 5 

51.2 

35.3 


9.3 

3.4 

1.6 

1 7 

. 1 

.8 

New Rochelle_ 

100 . 0 

99.8 

89.5 

52 . 7 

36.8 


6.3 

4.0 

2.8 

1.1 

.1 

.2 

New York_ 

100.0 

98.3 

63.7 

44.7 

19.0 


27.1 

7 . 5 

3.2 

4.2 

.1 

1.7 

Niagara Falls_ 

? 100 . 0 

' 99 . 5 

' 83.3 

' 42.6 

' 40 . 7 


' 12.4 

' 3.8 

' 1.2 

' 2.6 


'.5 

Rochester__ 

7 100.0 

' 99.6 

' 83.8 

' 54.8 

' 29 . 0 


' 8.1 

' 7.7 

' 5.3 

' 2.2 

'.2 

'.4 

Syracuse_ 

’’ 100.0 

' 99 . 2 

' 85.6 

' 45.0 

' 40.6 


' 8 . 5 

' 5.1 

' 3.9 

' 1.1 

'. 1 

'.8 

Utica_ 

' 100.0 

' 98.2 

' 76.8 

' 44.9 

' 31.9 


' 9 . 1 

' 12.3 

7 fi 7 

' 5.4 

'.2 

' 1.8 

Yonkers_ 

100.0 

98.8 

87.8 

41.8 

46 . 0 


4.3 

6.7 

3.4 

3.2 

.1 

1.2 

Pennsylvania: 













Allentown.__ 

100 . 0 

99.8 

81.3 

65.4 

15.9 


11.9 

6.6 

4.3 

1.6 

.7 

.2 

.\ltoona__ 

100 . 0 

99.3 

74.5 

58.3 

16 . 2 


17 . 2 

7 . 6 

5.1 

2.0 

.5 

.7 

Bethlehem_ 

100 . 0 

99.6 

79.9 

66 . 4 

13.5 


13.7 

6 . 0 

4 . 3 

1.5 

.2 

.4 

Chester_ 

100 . 0 

99 . 7 

76 . 5 

69.3 

7 . 2 


13.7 

9 . 5 

6.8 

1.9 

.8 

.3 

Erie ___ 

100 . 0 

100 . 0 

75.8 

63 . 2 

12 . 6 


17.3 

6 . 9 

4.3 

2 . 0 

.6 

(•) 

Johnstown_ 

100 . 0 

99.9 

75.2 

62.1 

13.1 


17 . 5 

7 . 2 

4.4 

2 . 2 

.6 

. 1 

Philadelphia_ 

100 . 0 

98.8 

91.1 

83.4 

7 . 7 


2.0 

5 . 7 

3.9 

1.3 

.5 

1 . 2 

Pittsburgh__ 

100.0 

99 . 4 

87.3 

76.8 

10 . 5 


6.8 

5 . 3 

3.3 

1.6 

.4 

.6 

Reading__ 

100 . 0 

99 . 3 

78.4 

60 . 7 

17 . 7 


11.1 

9 . 8 

6.0 

2 . 9 

.9 

. 7 

Scranton_ 

100 . 0 

99.4 

80 . 2 

73 . 0 

7 . 2 


13.6 

5.6 

3 . 5 

1.6 

.5 

.6 

Wilkes-Barre. _ 

100 . 0 

99.9 

79.2 

69 . 7 

9 . 5 


15 . 2 

5 . 5 

3 . 2 

1.8 

.5 

. 1 

North Central 













Illinois: 













Chicago__ 

• 100.0 

* 98 . 4 

• 89.0 

« 71 . 2 

• 17.8 


* 7.5 

» 1.9 


' 1.3 

».6 

• 1.6 

Springfield_ 

100 . 0 

98 . 0 

87.1 

60.4 

26 . 7 


8.6 

2.3 


.4 

1.9 

2.0 

Indiana: 













Evansville_ 

100.0 

99 . 7 

64.0 

30.0 

34.0 


29 . 1 

6.6 

6.1 

.5 


. 3 

Fort Wayne_ 

100.0 

97.9 

60.6 

31 . 2 

29.4 


32.9 

4.4 

3.4 

1.0 


2 . 1 

Indianapolis__ 

100 . 0 

98.3 

66 . 1 

31.8 

34.3 


28 . 3 

3.9 

3.2 

.7 


1.7 

South Bend__ 

100.0 

99 . 5 

59.2 

32.4 

26.8 


31.6 

8.7 

7 . 2 

1.5 


.5 

Terre Haute_ 

100 . 0 

99 . 2 

55.8 

17.4 

38.4 


34 . 7 

8 . 7 

8 . 2 

.5 


.8 

Iowa: 













Des Moines_ 

100.0 

99.6 

80.3 

50.0 

30 . 3 


13 . 6 

5 . 7 

2 . 9 

1.8 

1.0 

. 4 

Sioux City__ 

100.0 

99.3 

75.7 

53.4 

22 . 3 


15.0 

8.6 

4.3 

3 . 2 

1.1 

.7 

Kansas: 













Kansas City.. 

100.0 

99.9 

86.0 

24.0 

62.0 


13.9 

(') 


(*) 


. 1 

Toiieka.... 

100.0 

99.4 

84.4 

24.8 

59.6 


13 . 7 

1.3 


1.3 


.6 

Wichita.. 

100.0 

99.5 

88.2 

33.2 

55.0 


11 . 0 

.3 


. 3 


.5 

Michigan: 













Detroit___ 

100.0 

99.3 

81.8 

55.4 

26 . 4 


10.4 

7 . 1 

.8 

6.3 


.7 

Flint- _ 

100.0 

99.7 

83.0 

72.2 

10 . 8 


12.9 

3.8 

3.8 



. 3 

Grand Rapids_ 

100 . 0 

99.9 

77.9 

65.2 

12 . 7 


19 . 0 

3 . 0 

. 8 

2 . 2 


. 1 

Pontiac_ 

100 . 0 

99.9 

87.2 

78.8 

8.4 


11.1 

1 . 6 

1.6 



. 1 

Saginaw __ 

100.0 

98.3 

77.0 

68.6 

8.4 


9.3 

12 . 0 

2.4 

9.6 


1 7 

Minnesota: 













Duluth___ 

100.0 

99.0 

73.8 

39.4 

34.4 


17 . 7 

7 . 5 

2 . 4 

4.9 

. 2 

1 0 

Minneapolis_ 

100.0 

97.2 

78.9 

45.6 

33.3 


11.6 

6.7 

3 . 6 

2 . 9 

.2 

2 8 

St. Paul _ 

100.0 

98.7 

79 . 2 

49 . 7 

29 . 5 


15 . 5 

4 . 0 

1 . 7 

2.1 

2 

1.3 

Missouri: 












Kansas City__ 

100.0 

9 . 5.9 

78 . 4 

‘H 65 . 1 

13 . 3 


14 . 0 

3 . 5 


. 7 

2.8 

10 4. 1 

St. Louis_ 

100.0 

98.0 

86.7 

77.8 

8.9 


9 . 5 

1.8 


.5 

1 , 3 

2 0 

Nebraska: Omaha__ 

100.0 

97.5 

87.6 

49.6 

38.0 


8.8 

1.1 


.9 

.2 

2. a 


Seo footnotes at end of table. ■ 


124 







































































































































































































Table C-18. Percentage distribution of amount of public and private assistance and earnings under specified 

Federal work programs, by urban area, 1935 —Continued 


Public funds 



Total 





Earnings under 






Geographic division. State, 

public 

and 


General relief > 

Federal work 

Special types of public assistance 


and urban area i 

private 
funds» 

Total 









Private 


Total 

Direct 

relief 

Work 

relief 

Civil 

Works 

Pro- 

Projects 
operated 
by the 

Total 

Old-age 

assist- 

Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

Aid to 
the 
blind 

funds 0 







gram < 

WPAs 


ance 

children 


North Central—C on. 













Ohio: 













Akron..... 

100. 0 

99. 4 

67. 6 

52.5 

40.8 

15.0 

15.9 


22.9 
20. 3 

9.0 

17.0 

11.7 

6.4 

15.0 

11.5 

14.5 

10.6 
6.6 


1.1 
1.8 
1.9 

0.2 

1.2 


Canton_ 

Cincinnati__ 

100.0 

100.0 

62.7 


7.7 
14.0 
9.4 

0.6 

(•) 

100.0 

98.4 

73. 0 

60.8 

12.2 

9.5 

15.4 

10.5 
13.3 

12.5 
13.2 



Cleveland. _ .. 

100. 0 

98.6 

80. 2 

70. 7 


12.0 

17.8 
17.6 
22.0 

15.9 
21.4 

. 4 

1.6 

Columbus. _ .. 

100. 0 

99. 5 

66. 7 

51. 3 


4. 2 
12.1 
9.5 
13.3 
8.7 
6.1 

2. 0 

. 2 

1.4 

Dayton__ 

100. 0 

99.6 

70. 5 

60. 0 


2. 0 

.9 

.6 

Springfield_ 

100.0 

99.3 

62.8 

49. 5 


1. 6 
1.0 

. 5 

.4 

Toledo...... 

100.0 

99.9 

73. 4 

60.9 

58.7 


. 2 

.7 

Youngstown_ 

100.0 

99.9 

71.9 


1.6 

. 4 

.1 

Wisconsin: 


1.0 

. 5 

. 1 

Kenosha_ 

100.0 

99.6 

82.9 

68 1 

14.8 
23.3 
23.1 
22.0 


11.8 
14.1 
14.7 

9 8 

4.9 
5.1 
6.8 
6.0 





Madison.___ 

100.0 

99.8 

80.6 

57. 3 


1. 7 

2. 5 
4.1 

. 4 
.8 

.4 

Milwaiikee __ 

100.0 

99. 1 

77.6 

64, 6 


2.1 

. 2 

Racine___ 

100.0 

99.0 

83.2 

61.2 


4. 2 
5.3 

. 6 

• 9 

South Atlantic and South 






. 7 

1.0 

Central 













Alabama: 













Birmingham_ 

100.0 

100.0 

72.3 

26.8 

45.5 


27.7 





(*) 

.6 

4.3 

Mobile... ... . 

100.0 

99.4 

75.2 

28.1 

47.1 


24.2 





Delaware: Wilmington_ 

100.0 

95.7 

70.9 

69.2 

1.7 


13.8 

11.0 

6.9 

4.1 


District of Columbia: Wash- 







ington___ 

100.0 

98.1 

83.4 

40.7 

42.7 


12.6 

2.1 


2.1 


1.9 

Florida: 







Jacksonville... 

100.0 

99.5 

73.9 

27.7 

46.2 


21.1 

16.2 

14.2 

4.5 

8.2 


4.5 

8.2 

w 


Miami__ 

100.0 

92.4 

68.0 

19.5 

48. 5 



. 5 
7.6 
.9 
10 7.8 

Georgia: Atlanta.. 

100.0 

99.1 

84.9 

38.4 

46.5 




Kentucky: Louisville_ 

100.0 

92.2 

10 70. 2 

10 37. 4 

10 32. 8 


15.3 

6.7 


6.4 

10.3 

Louisiana: 






New Orleans__ 

100.0 

98.9 

86.4 

23.5 

62.9 


12. 5 





1.1 
3.0 
11 1.4 

Shreveport_ 

100.0 

97.0 

77.6 

26.4 

51. 2 


16.7 

11 6.3 

2.7 
n 1.9 


1.7 

11.7 

1.0 

U.7 

Maryland: Baltimore_ 

» 100.0 

11 98.6 

11 90.4 

11 83. 4 

11 7.0 


n. 6 

North Carolina: 


Asheville__ _ 

100.0 

100.0 

91.3 

53.3 

38.0 


8.4 

.3 


. 3 



Charlotte_ 

100.0 

94.2 

83.3 

30.3 

53.0 


10. 4 

. 5 


5 


5.8 

Greensboro_ 

100.0 

99.8 

92.8 

33.8 

59.0 


6. 7 

.3 


3 


Winston-Salem_ 

100.0 

99.3 

86.7 

31.9 

54.8 


12.1 

.5 


5 



Oklahoma: Tulsa__ 

100.0 

92.6 

59.7 

17.4 

42.3 


32.1 

.8 


7 

J 

7.4 

1.5 

South Carolina: Charleston... 

100.0 

98.5 

87.2 

10.4 

76.8 


11.3 




Tennessee: 











Knoxville_ 

100.0 

99.6 

84.8 

41.0 

43.8 


12. 3 

2. 5 


2.5 

2.0 



Memphis...___ 

100.0 

97.9 

80.4 

29.5 

50.9 


15. 5 

2.0 



2!i 

3 

Nashville__ 

100.0 

99.7 

84.8 

47.0 

37.8 


14.9 



Texas: 












Dallas_ 

100.0 

97.4 

86.9 

32.2 

54.7 


9. 2 

1.3 


1.3 


2.6 

3 

El Paso... 

100.0 

99.7 

82.4 

36.3 

46.1 


17.3 



Fort Worth___ ... 

100.0 

99.7 

78.3 

48.3 

30.0 


21.4 





3 

Houston___ 

100.0 

99.5 

85.0 

58.1 

26.9 


13. 6 

.9 


9 


5 

San Antonio_ 

100.0 

99.2 

90.6 

49.8 

40.8 


8.6 




.8 

Virginia: 











Norfolk___ 

100.0 

99.1 

86.1 

26.7 

59.4 


12.8 

.2 


2 


.9 

6.3 

(») 

1 

Richmond_ 

100.0 

93.7 

77.4 

30.9 

46.5 


15. 5 

.8 


. 8 


Roanoke... 

100.0 

100.0 

81.1 

5.3 

75.8 


18.9 

(«) 


(») 


West Virginia: Huntington... 

100.0 

99.9 

84.6 

47.7 

36.9 


15.3 



Mountain and Pacific 












California: 













Los Angeles_ . 

100.0 

99.6 

87.1 

59.4 

27.7 


6. 3 

6 2 

3 6 

1.4 

3.7 

4 2 

1.3 

1.4 
1.4 

5 


Oakland_ 

100.0 

99.5 

81.7 

33.2 

48. 5 


6. 7 

11.1 

6.0 

6 9 

K 

Sacramento_ 

100.0 

99.0 

78.1 

14.4 

63. 7 


8. 4 

12 6 

1.0 

.-2 

San Diego_ 

100.0 

99.8 

87.2 

38.0 

49.2 


7.1 

5. 5 

3.9 

1. 1 

San Francisco_ 

100.0 

98.4 

81.9 

4.3.4 

38. 5 


9.1 

7. 4 

3. 7 

3.0 

7 

1.6 

5 

Colorado: Denver__ 

100.0 

99. 5 

77.1 

52.1 

2,5.0 


5. 8 

16.6 

14. 5 

1. 6 

5 

Oregon: Portland__ 

100.0 

99.7 

80.2 

40.2 

40.0 


12.4 

7.1 

5.7 

1.4 


3 

Utah: Salt Lake City_ 

100.0 

97.3 

82.5 

57.4 

25.1 


12.6 

2.2 

.9 

1.3 


2.7 

Washington: 



Seattle _ 

100.0 

98.7 

83.6 

65.4 

18.2 


7.3 

7.8 

4.7 

2.1 

1.0 

1.3 

Tacoma_ 

100.0 

100.0 

79.6 

71.0 

8.6 


11.6 

8.8 

6.1 

1.8 

.9 









1 See app. A for the territory included in each urban area. Percentages 
based on figures which relate to territory other than that shown for the area 
in app. A are footnoted. The entire percentage distribution is footnoted 
when the difference in coverage applies to earnings under one of the Federal 
work programs. 

2 Figures on which these percentages are based exclude cost of administra¬ 
tion; of materials, equipment, and other items incident to operation of work 
programs; and of transient care. 

> Figures on which these percentages are based include statutory aid to 
veterans administered on basis of need. 

* Terminated in 1934. 

« Figures from the W PA, Division of Statistics, on which these percentages 
are based represent earnings of persons employed on projects operated by 


the WPA within these areas; figures are not available for earnings of persons 
employed on projects other than those operated by the WPA. 

* Figures on which these percentages are based include direct and work 
relief and aid to veterans. 

’ The percentage distribution is distorted to an unknown extent because 
figure for WPA relates to county. 

* Less than 0.1 percent. 

* The percentage distribution is distorted to an unknown extent because 
figure for WPA relates to city. 

lo Figure on which this percentage is based relates to city. 

■> The percentage distribution is distorted to an unknown extent because 
figure for WPA relates to Baltimore County as well as the city of Baltimore. 


125 































































































































































































Table C-19 .—Percentage distribution of amount of public and private assistance and earnings under specified 

Federal work programs, by urban area, 1936 


Public funds 


Geographic division, State, 
and urban area > 


Total__ 

New Engi.and 

Connecticut: 

Bridgeport... 

Hartford... 

New Britain___ 

New Haven... 

Maine: Portland_ 

Massachusetts: 

Boston..... 

Brockton.. 

Cambridge... 

Fall River... 

Lawrence_ 

Lowell_ 

Lynn_ 

Malden... 

New Bedford... 

Newton_ 

Springfield___ 

Worcester... 

Rhode Island: Providence.... 

Middle Atlantic 
New Jersey: 

Jersey City.... 

Newark... 

Trenton_ 

New York: 

Albany.... 

Buffalo___ 

New Rochelle___ 

New York_ 

Niagara Falls.... 

Rochester_ 

Syracuse_ 

Utica___ 

Yonkers___ 

Pennsylvania: 

Allentown_ 

Altoona___ 

Bethlehem_ 

Chester___ 

Erie_ 

Johnstown_ 

Philadelphia.... 

Pittsburgh_ 

Reading.. 

Scranton_ 

Wilkes-Barre___ 

Nokth Centbal 
Illinois: 

Chicago.. 

Springfield.... 

Indiana: 

Evansville..... 

Fort Wayne_ 

Indianapolis__ 

South Bend_ 

Terre Haute_ 

Iowa: 

Des Moines_ 

Sioux City_ 

Kansas: 

Kansas City_ 

Topeka.... 

Wichita_ 

Michigan: 

Detroit__ 

Flint__ 

Grand Rapids.. 

Pontiac..... 

Saginaw. 

Minnesota: 

Duluth___ 

Minneapolis_ 

St. Paul___ 

Missouri: 

Kansas City_ 

St. Louis.. 

Nebraska: Omaha... 


Total 
public 
and 
private 
funds » 

Total 

General relief * 

Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 

Special types of public assistance • 

Private 
funds ^ 

Total 

Direct 

relief 

Work 

relief 

Civil 
Works 
Pro¬ 
gram 8 

Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA 8 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

children 

Aid to 
the 
blind 

100.0 

99.1 

23.8 

23.6 

0.2 


68.0 

7.3 

4.5 

2.4 

0.4 

0.9 

» 100. 0 

8 99.1 

8 7.7 

8 5.2 

8 2.5 


8 87.6 

8 3.8 

8 2.3 

• 1.5 

(8.) 

8.9 

100.0 

92.7 

26.8 

26.6 

.2 


55.2 

10.7 

7.3 

3.3 

.1 

7.3 

100.0 

99.7 

17.4 

12.3 

5.1 


75.0 

7.3 

4.8 

2.6 

C) 

.3 

« 100.0 

8 98.7 

8 12.9 

8 12.9 



8 80.3 

8 5.5 

8 3.6 

8 1.8 

8. 1 

81.3 

* 100.0 

8 98.8 

8 22.7 

8 22.7 



8 72.8 

8 3.3 

8 1.1 

8 1.6 

8.7 

8 1 2 

100.0 

97.1 

22.3 

22.1 

.2 


65.2 

9.6 

6.4 

4.0 

.2 

2.9 

100.0 

98.0 

23.4 

23:4 

(') 


59.7 

14.9 

12.1 

2.6 

.3 

2.0 

100.0 

97.8 

34.4 

34.4 



50.8 

12.6 

7.7 

4.4 

.6 

2.2 

100.0 

99.9 

18.9 

18.7 

.2 


71.9 

9.1 

7.0 

1.8 

.3 

. 1 

100.0 

99.1 

13.5 

13.4 

. 1 


74.9 

10.7 

8.0 

2.6 

. 1 

.9 

100.0 

98.9 

21.5 

21.1 

.4 


66.2 

11.2 

7.5 

3.4 

.3 

1.1 

100.0 

98.8 

21.0 

21.0 

(') 


60.5 

17.3 

14.4 

2.8 

.1 

1.2 

100.0 

99.9 

30.0 

30.0 

(“) 


60.3 

9.6 

7.3 

2.1 

.2 

.1 

100.0 

99.4 

20.3 

20.2 

.1 


62.4 

16.7 

14.1 

2.4 

.2 

.6 

100.0 

98.0 

34.4 

34.4 

(•) 


48.8 

14.8 

9.7 

4.9 

.2 

2.0 

100.0 

98.8 

30.8 

30.7 

. 1 


60.1 

7.9 

6.8 

1.0 

.1 

1.2 

100.0 

98.9 

36.5 

34.9 

1.6 


52.1 

10.3 

6.7 

3.4 

.2 

1.1 

8 100. 0 

8 99.1 

• 13.9 

8 6.7 

• 7. 2 


8 81.3 

8 3.9 

8 2.1 

81.8 


8.9 

* 100.0 

8 99.9 

8 9.1 

8 9. 1 



8 88.3 

8 2.5 

8 1.0 

8 1.4 

8.1 

8.1 

« 100.0 

8 99.7 

8 22.4 

8 22.4 



8 71.6 

8 5.7 

8 1.8 

8 3.8 

8. 1 

8.3 

8 100.0 

8 99.6 

8 15.4 

8 15.4 



8 79.6 

8 4.6 

8 2.2 

8 2. 2 

». 2 

8.4 

8100.0 

9 99.2 

8 9.9 

8 9.3 

8.6 


8 85.2 

8 4.1 

8 2.8 

8 1.1 

8.2 

8.8 

100.0 

99.3 

27.1 

26.5 

.6 


68.4 

3.8 

1.9 

1.7 

.2 

.7 

100.0 

99.9 

50.3 

49.0 

1.3 


43.7 

6.9 

4.3 

1.6 

.1 

.1 

100.0 

99.1 

29.1 

29.1 

(•) 


64.3 

6.7 

2.5 

3.1 

.1 

.9 

8100.0 

8 99.6 

815.9 

8 15.8 

8.1 


8 80.1 

8 3.6 

8 1.4 

8 2. 2 


8.4 

8 100.0 

8 99.6 

8 27.7 

8 27.2 

8. 5 


8 64.5 

8 7.4 

8 5.2 

8 2.0 

8.2 

8.4 

8 ICO. 0 

8 99.4 

8 22.1 

8 21.3 

8.8 


8 72.9 

8 4.4 

8 3.5 

8.8 

8. 1 

8.6 

8 100. 0 

8 98.9 

8 24.7 

8 23.5 

8 1.2 


8 64.3 

8 9.9 

8 6.6 

8 4.2 

8.1 

8 1.1 

100.0 

99.2 

27.3 

25.1 

2. 2 


64.7 

7.2 

4.1 

3.0 

.1 

.8 

100.0 

99.8 

27.3 

27.3 



65.3 

7.2 

4.7 

1.4 

1. 1 

.2 

100.0 

99.7 

15.3 

15.3 



77.0 

7.4 

4.6 

1.4 

1.4 

.3 

100.0 

99.7 

22.5 

22.5 



71.0 

6.2 

4.1 

1.3 

.8 

.3 

100.0 

99.6 

12.8 

12.8 



78.4 

8.4 

5.6 

1.6 

1.2 

.4 

100.0 

100.0 

20.2 

20.2 



72.9 

6.9 

4.2 

1.5 

1. 2 

(8) 

100.0 

99.8 

19.2 

19.2 



73.7 

6.9 

4.4 

1.6 

. 9 

. 2 

100.0 

99.0 

44.0 

44.0 



48.0 

7.0 

4.5 

1.4 

1.1 

1.0 

100.0 

99.5 

27.7 

27.7 



66.2 

5.6 

3. 4 

1. 5 

.7 

5 

100.0 

99.3 

19.5 

19.5 



70.6 

9.2 

5. 3 

2. 4 

1. 5 

7 

100.0 

99.5 

24.7 

24.7 



69.9 

4.9 

3.0 

1. 2 

. 7 

. 5 

100.0 

99.9 

26.5 

26.5 



68.5 

4.9 

2.9 

1. 3 

.7 

, 1 

10100. 0 

lo 98. 8 

18 32. 9 

18 32. 8 

18.1 


10 63. 0 

10 2.9 

101.3 

10 1.1 

10.5 

10 1.2 

100.0 

98.8 

20.8 

20.8 



72.2 

6.8 

3.6 

.6 

1.6 

L_2 

100.0 

99.8 

9.0 

9.0 



84.8 

6.0 

6.2 

.6 


J2 

100.0 

98.8 

6.4 

6.4 



87.0 

5.4 

4.0 

1.2 

. 2 

1 2 

100.0 

98.9 

13.3 

13.3 



80. 2 

5.4 

4.6 

.5 

. 3 

1 ) 

100.0 

99.8 

6.7 

6.7 

(») 


86.4 

6.7 

5.6 

1.0 

. 1 

.2 

100.0 

99.6 

4.6 

4.6 



89.2 

6.8 

6. 3 

.4 


4 

100.0 

99.8 

18.9 

18.6 

.3 


71.3 

9.6 

7.9 

1.0 

.7 

. 2 

mo 

99.4 

21.9 

21.9 

(') 


69.5 

8.0 

6.7 

1.7 

.6 

.6 

100.0 

100.0 

9.5 

9.5 



90.5 

(') 


(«) 



100.0 

99.5 

15.0 

15.0 



83.6 

.9 


.9 


5 

100.0 

99.6 

23.3 

23.3 



76.0 

.3 


. 3 


4 

100.0 

99.4 

30.3 

30.3 

(») 


57.9 

11.2 

3.9 

7. 2 

. 1 

. 6 

100.0 

99.8 

28.6 

28.3 

.3 


59.4 

11.8 

9.8 

2.0 



100.0 

99.9 

16.6 

16.4 

.2 


76.1 

7. 2 

5.1 

2.1 

(8) 

1 

100.0 

99.9 

25.8 

24.8 

1.0 


59.5 

14.6 

9.3 

5.3 

(0) 

, 1 

100.0 

99.1 

28.4 

28.0 

.4 


55.2 

15.5 

9.1 

6.4 

(•) 

.9 

100.0 

99.3 

14.3 

14.3 

(') 


75.3 

9.7 

6.2 

3. 3 

.2 

.7 

100.0 

98.3 

27.4 

27.4 

C) 


61.2 

9.7 

7.2 

2.4 

. 1 

1 7 

100.0 

99.3 

24.1 

24.1 

(') 


69.5 

5.7 

4.1 

1.5 

.1 

.7 

100.0 

97.7 

11 5.2 

11 5.2 



84. 2 

8 3 

^ P 

5 

1 Q 

11 2.3 

100.0 

98.5 

14.8 

14.8 



79. 6 

4.1 

9 fi 

4 


100.0 

98.2 

10.1 

10.1 



79.1 

9.0 

6.9 

L9 

.2 

1.8 


See footnotes at end of table. 


126 







































































































































































lable C-19. Percentage dis^ibution of amount of public and private assistance and earnings under specified 

tederal work programs, by urban area, 1936 —Continued 


Geographic division, State, 
and urban area • 


Noeth Central—C on. 
Ohio; 

Akron_ 

Canton...... 

Cincinnati... 

Cleveland__ 

Columbus__ 

Dayton....... 

Springfield.... 

Toledo.... 

Youngstown.. 

Wisconsin: 

Kenosha.. 

Madison___ 

Milwaukee_ 

Racine... 

South Atlantic and South 
Central 

Alabama: 

Birmingham_ 

Mobile_ 

Delaware; Wilmington_ 

District of Columbia: Wash¬ 
ington___ 

Florida: 

Jacksonville_ 

Miami___ 

Georgia: Atlanta__ 

Kentucky; Louisville_ 

Louisiana: 

New Orleans_ 

Shreveport_ 

Maryland: Baltimore.. 

North Carolina: 

Asheville_ 

Charlotte_ 

Greensboro_ 

Winston-Salem_ 

Oklahoma: Tulsa_ 

South Carolina: Charleston... 
Tennessee: 

Knoxville_ 

Memphis.. 

Nashville___ 

exas: 

Dallas__ 

El Paso... 

Fort Worth_ 

Houston_ 

San Antonio_ 

Virginia; 

Norfolk__ 

. Richmond...__ 

Roanoke___ 

West Virginia: Huntington... 

Mountain and Pacific 
C alifornia: 

Los Angeles__ 

Oakland..... 

Sacramento__ 

San Diego... 

San Francisco_ 

Colorado; Denver_ 

Oregon: Portland_ 

Utah: Salt Lake City_ 

Washington: 

Seattle...__ 

Tacoma 


Public funds 


Total 
public 
and 
private 
funds * 

Total 

General relie 

f» 

Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 

Special types of public assistance 

Total 

Direct 

relief 

Work 

relief 

Civil 
Works 
Pro¬ 
gram * 

Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA« 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

children 

Aid to 
the 
blind 

100.0 

99.6 

14.7 

12.1 

2.6 


77.4 

7.6 

6.7 

0.7 

0-1 

100.0 

100.0 

17.1 

17.1 

(•) 


63.2 

19.7 

17.3 

1.7 

,7 

100.0 

98.7 

19.3 

18.1 

1.2 


68.3 

11.1 

9. 2 

1.6 


100.0 

98.9 

22.8 

21.8 

1.0 


70.3 

5.8 

4.2 

1. 6 


100.0 

99.8 

15. 2 

14.8 

.4 


69.6 

15.0 

12.8 

1.7 

.6 

100.0 

99.8 

15.6 

15.6 

(•) 


70.7 

13.5 

11.8 

1.3 

.4 

100.0 

99.6 

14.6 

14.6 



66.8 

18. 2 

If) 8 

U) 


100.0 

99. 9 

15.3 

15.1 

.2 

1 - 

75.9 

8.7 

7.6 

.8 

.3 

100.0 

99.9 

13.1 

13.0 

.1 


79.2 

7.6 

6.6 

.8 

.3 

100.0 

99.8 

17.8 

17.8 



73.7 

8. 3 

4 4 

3 3 

5 

100.0 

99.8 

17.1 

17.1 



64.2 

18. 5 

14 1 

3 7 

7 

100.0 

99.4 

17. 5 

17.5 



74.0 

7, 9 

3. fl 

3 6 

4 

100.0 

99.2 

20.0 

20.0 



63. 2 

16.0 

10.3 

^ 1 

.6 

100.0 

100.0 

1.5 

1.6 



92.5 

6.0 

2.6 

3. 4 

100.0 

99.8 

.7 

.7 



92.8 

6.3 

2. 7 

3. 6 


100.0 

95.6 

17.9 

17.9 



65.7 

12.0 

8.3 

3. 7 


100.0 

97.8 

21.3 

21.3 



65.1 

11.4 

2.0 

9 


100.0 

99.4 

4.4 

3.4 

1.0 


91.3 

3.7 

1.1 

2.6 

(•) 

100.0 

95.6 

6.6 

5.7 

.9 


81.0 

7.9 

1. 7 

6. 2 


100.0 

99.2 

10.5 

10.5 



88.7 





100.0 

95.2 

« 19.0 

>1 18. 7 

‘1.3 


69.3 

6.9 

.9 

6.7 

>1.3 

100.0 

99.1 

5.3 

6.3 



90.4 

3. 4 

1.4 

2.0 


100.0 

98.3 

19. 6 

19.5 



60.8 

18.0 

9.0 

9.0 


H 100.0 

» 97. 5 

» 16. 6 

J> 16. 6 



" 63.1 

'» 17. 8 

7.3 

ng A 

13 7 

100.0 

100.0 

15.6 

15.6 



84.0 

.4 

.3 


100.0 

96.3 

6. 7 

6. 7 



89.1 

. 5 


. 4 


100.0 

99.7 

13. 7 

13. 7 



85.4 

.6 


, 4 

J2 

100.0 

93.9 

7.8 

7.8 



85.8 

.3 


. 3 

(^) 

100.0 

96.9 

8.5 

8. 5 



78.9 

9. 6 

6. 2 

3. 2 

. 1 

100.0 

99.2 

11.4 

6.4 

6.0 


87.8 





100.0 

99.7 

4.3 

4.3 



93.3 

2.1 


2.1 


100.0 

98.1 

4.4 

4.4 



92. 2 

1. 5 


1. 6 


100.0 

99.6 

3.9 

3.9 



95. 7 





100.0 

97.9 

7.0 

7.0 



72.0 

18.9 

18.1 

.8 


100.0 

99.6 

6.4 

5.4 



88.0 

6.2 

6.2 



100.0 

99.8 

13.0 

13.0 



79.7 

7.1 

7.1 



100. 0 

99.5 

26.5 

26. 5 



64.0 

9.0 

8.4 

. 6 


100.0 

99.3 

8. 2 

8.2 



81.4 

9. 7 

9. 7 



100.0 

99.1 

7.3 

7.3 

(®) 


91. 6 

.2 


.2 


100.0 

95.8 

21.5 

21. 5 

(') 


73.7 

.6 


.6 


100.0 

100.0 

6.8 

6.8 


93. 1 

. 1 


.1 


100.0 

99.8 

8.7 

8. 7 



90. 7 

.4 

.4 



100.0 

99.6 

22.1 

22.0 

.1 


65.6 

12.0 

9.0 

1.4 

1.6 

100.0 

99.7 

15.4 

15.3 

.1 


70.5 

13.8 

9.6 

3.0 

1.3 

100.0 

99. 2 

15.4 

15.3 

.1 


62.6 

21.2 

14.5 

6.0 

1.7 

100.0 

99.9 

16. 5 

15.5 

(•) 


71.2 

13.2 

11.6 

1.1 

.6 

100.0 

98. 7 

17.2 

17. 2 

m 


70.8 

10. 7 

7.6 

2.4 

.7 

100.0 

99. 6 

14. 0 

14.0 



61.4 

24.2 

20.8 

2.8 

.6 

100.0 

99. 7 

12. 6 

12. 6 

(«) 


75.1 

12.0 

10.7 

1.1 

.2 

100.0 

96.6 

15.3 

15.2 

.1 


68.9 

12.4 

7.0 

6.2 

.2 

100.0 

99.3 

14.4 ’ 

14.3 

. 1 


70.4 

14.5 

11.6 

2.2 

.7 

100.0 

100.0 

10.7 

10. 7 

(•) 


74.0 

15.3 

11.0 

3.5 

.8 


Private 
funds • 


(•) 


0.4 

1.3 

1.1 

.2 

.2 

.4 

.1 

.1 


(•) 


.2 

4.4 

2.2 

.6 
4.6 
.8 
» 4.8 


.9 
1.7 
>» 2 . 6 


3.7 

.3 

6.1 

3.1 

.8 


.3 

1.9 

.4 

2.1 

.4 

.2 

.5 

.7 

.9 

4.2 


.2 


.4 

.3 

.8 

.1 

1.3 
.4 
.3 

3.4 

.7 


1 See app. A for the territory included in each urban area. Percentages 
based on figures which relate to territory other than that shown for the area 
in app. A are footnoted. The entire percentage distribution is footnoted 
when the difference in coverage applies to earnings under one of the Federal 
work programs. 

> Figures on which these percentages are based exclude cost of administra¬ 
tion; of materials, equipment, and other items incident to operation of work 
programs; and of transient care. 

> Figures on which these percentages are based include statutory aid to 
veterans administered on basis of need. 

* Terminated in 1934. 

* Figures from the WPA, Division of Statistics, on which these percentages 
are based represent earnings of persons employed on projects operated by 
the WPA within these areas; figures are not available for earnings of persons 
employed on projects other than those operated by the WPA. 


* Figures on which these percentages are based include data for areas in 
States with plans approved by the Social Security Board and for areas in 
States not participating under the Social Security Act. 

' Figures on which these percentages are based include direct and work 
relief and aid to veterans. 

»The percentage distribution is distorted to an unknown extent because 
figure for WPA relates to county. 

• Less than 0.1 percent. 

lo The percentage distribution is distorted to an unknown extent because 
figure for WPA relates to city. 

Figure on which this percentage is based relates to city. 

>* The percentage distribution is distorted to an unknown extent because 
figure for WPA relates to Baltimore County as well as the city of Baltimore. 


127 


00 to to 




































































































































































Table C-20 .—Percentage distribution of amount of public and private assistance and earnings under specified 

Federal work programs, by urban area, 1937 


Public funds 


Geographic division, State, 
and urban area > 

' 

Total 
public 
and 
private 
funds * 

Total 

General relief* 

Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 

Special types of public assistance ’ 

Private 
funds 8 

Total 

Direct 

relief 

Work 

relief 

Civil 
Works 
Pro¬ 
gram 8 

Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA 8 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

children 

Aid to 
the 
blind 

Total.__ 

100.0 

99.0 

25.9 

25.8 

0.1 


58.9 

14.2 

10.2 

3.4 

0.6 

1.0 

New England 













Connecticut: 





1 








Bridgeport-.. 

s 100.0 

•99.1 

8 9.8 

8 7.8 

8 2.0 


8 79.3 

8 10.0 

8 7.9 

8 2.0 

8 .1 

8.9 

Hartford-..... 

100.0 

93.2 

22.4 

22.4 

(“) 


49.7 

21. 1 

17.4 

3.6 

. 1 

6.8 

New Britain..... 

100.0 

99.4 

16.8 

15.4 

1.4 


65. 8 

16. 8 

12.9 

3.9 

(') 

.6 

New Haven_ 

«100.0 

8 98.4 

8 11.1 

8 11. 1 



8 75. 3 

8 12.0 

8 9.9 

8 2.0 

8. 1 

8 1. 6 

Maine: Portland..... 

8100.0 

8 98.6 

8 26.6 

8 26.6 



8 65.8 

8 6.1 

8^3 

8 2. 4 

8 1.4 

8 1. 5 

Massachusetts: 













Boston.. ... 

100.0 

96.6 

20.9 

20.8 

.1 


59.3 

16.4 

11.4 

4.8 

.2 

3.4 

Brockton ... 

100.0 

98.2 

20.2 

20.2 



51.1 

26.9 

23. 7 

3.0 

.2 

1.8 

Cambridge_ _ 

100.0 

98.2 

26.9 

26.9 



62. 2 

19. 1 

13.0 

5. 7 

.4 

1.8 

Fall River_'_ 

100. 0 

99.9 

20. 7 

20.7 



57. 5 

21. 7 

18.1 

3.3 

.3 

. 1 

Lawrence.. _ 

100.0 

99.0 

20.9 

20.9 



64.0 

24.1 

20. 3 

3.6 

.2 

1.0 

Lowell_ 

100.0 

99.0 

25.1 

25.1 



53.0 

20.9 

16. 5 

4. 1 

.3 

1.0 

Lynn__ 

100.0 

98.5 

16.3 

16.3 



63. 7 

28. 5 

25.3 

3.1 

. 1 

1.5 

Malden_ . 

100.0 

100.0 

32.8 

32.8 



46. 2 

21.0 

17.9 

2. 8 

.3 

(8) 

New Bedford_ 

100.0 

99.3 

23.1 

23.1 



45. 5 

30. 7 

27. 5 

2.9 

.3 

.7 

Newton_ 

100.0 

97.3 

40. 5 

40.5 



32. 9 

23.9 

15.9 

7.9 

.1 

2.7 

Springfield_ . 

100.0 

98.5 

28.3 

28.3 



51. 6 

18.6 

15.5 

3.0 

.1 

1. 5 

Worcester.. 

100.0 

98.8 

36.4 

36.4 



41.7 

20.7 

15.9 

4.6 

.2 

1. 2 

Rhode Island: Providence_ 

* 100.0 

8 99.0 

817.0 

8 8.1 

8 8.9 


8 73.8 

8 8.2 

8 6.8 

8 2.4 


8 1.0 

Middle Atlantic 













New Jersey: 













Jersey City.... 

* 100.0 

8 99.9 

8 11.9 

8 11.9 



8 84.6 

8 3.5 

8 1.7 

8 1.7 

8.1 

8. 1 

New^k.. 

8 100.0 

8 99.7 

8 25.1 

8 25.1 



9 67. 7 

8 6.9 

8 2.8 

8 4.0 

8. 1 

8 3 

Trenton_ 

8 100.0 

8 99.3 

8 16.1 

8 16.1 



8 76. 7 

8 

8 3.7 

^26 

8^ 

8. 7 

New York: 













Albany__ 

9 100.0 

8 99.0 

8 13.1 

8 13.1 

(8 8) 


8 79.9 

8 6.0 

8 4.3 

81. 4 

8.3 

8 1.0 

Buflalb.... 

100.0 

98.8 

35.8 

35.8 


55.0 

8.0 

4.9 

2.9 

.2 

1. 2 

New Rochelle_ 

100.0 

99.9 

57.4 

57.3 

. 1 


29.8 

12. 7 

8.3 

4.3 

. 1 

. 1 

New York_ 

100.0 

99.1 

33.3 

33.3 



57. 1 

8. 7 

5.0 

3.6 

. 1 

. 9 

Niagara Falls__ 

8 100.0 

8 99.2 

8 27.3 

8 27.3 

(8 8) 


8 62.9 

8 9.0 

8 4.7 

8 4.3 

(8 8) 

8.8 

Rochester_ 

8 100.0 

8 99. 5 

8 32.4 

8 32.4 

(8 8) 


8 53. 6 

8 13. 5 

810.0 

8 3. 3 

8. 2 

8. 5 

Syracuse..... 

8 100. 0 

8 99.3 

8 27.6 

8 27.5 

8.1 


8 63. 6 

8 8. 1 

8 7.0 

8 1.0 

8. 1 

8. 7 

Utica___ 

8 100. 0 

8 98.6 

8 26.8 

8 26.7 

8.1 


8 55.6 

8 16.2 

8 10. 5 

8 6.6 

8.1 

8 1. 4 

Yonkers_ 

100.0 

99.0 

22.6 

22.4 

.1 


66.1 

10.4 

6. 3 

4.0 

. 1 

1.0 

Pennsvlvania: 












Allentown__ 

100.0 

99.7 

19.4 

19.4 



65.1 

16.2 

10.6 

2. 8 

1. 8 

3 

Altoona_ 

100.0 

99.4 

17.5 

17. 5 



63. 5 

18. 4 

13. 0 

3. 3 

2.1 

6 

Bethlehem... 

100.0 

99.6 

18.2 

18.2 



67. 5 

13.9 

9. 5 

2.9 

1 Ft 

4 

Chester___ 

100.0 

99.3 

14.1 

14.1 



67.9 

17. 3 

12.0 

3. 3 

2 0 

7 

Erie ... 

100.0 

100.0 

17.0 

17.0 



63.9 

19.1 

13. 9 

3. 2 

2 0 

( 8 ) 

Johnstown... 

100.0 

99.9 

24.6 

24.6 



58.1 

17.2 

11.9 

3. 6 

1. 7 

. 1 

Philadelphia.... 

100.0 

98.9 

45.0 

45.0 



42. 4 

11. 6 

8.1 

2.1 

1.3 

1 1 

Pittsburgh_ . 

100.0 

99.3 

25.4 

25.4 



62. 5 

11. 4 

7. 7 

2. 7 

1 0 

7 

Reading.. 

100.0 

99.4 

19.9 

19.9 



59.1 

20. 4 

14. 7 

3.3 

2 4 

6 

Scranton_ 

100.0 

99.5 

25.7 

25.7 



65. 6 

8.3 

6. 3 

2.2 

. 8 


Wilkes-Barre.. 

100.0 

99.9 

27.3 

27.3 



65.4 

7.2 

4.3 

2.1 

,8 

! 1 

North Central 












Illinois: 













Chicago___ 

10 100.0 

10 98.7 

10 35. 5 

10 35. 5 



10 50.9 

1012.3 

>® 10. 6 

80 1.1 

10 7 

w 1 3 

Springfield_ 

100.0 

98.6 

32.3 

32.3 



45.2 

21.1 

17. 8 

1.0 

2.3 

1.4 

Indiana: 










Evansville__ 

100.0 

99.7 

10.1 

10.1 



75. 2 

14. 4 

9 2 

4 8 


3 

Fort Wayne.... 

100.0 

98.4 

5.8 

5.8 



74. 8 

17. 8 

11.1 

6.1 

6 

1* 6 

Indianapolis_ 

100.0 

98.8 

16.2 

16.2 



67. 4 

15. 2 

10 4 

4 2 

6 

1 ? 

South Bend__ 

100.0 

99.7 

10.7 

10.7 



76. 5 

12. 6 

8 2 

4 1 

9 

3 

Terre Haute.__ 

100.0 

99.6 

7.2 

7.2 



80. 3 

12.1 

9 4 

2.2 

5 

4 

Iowa: 












Des Moines... 

100.0 

99.7 

24.4 

24.3 

. 1 


61.1 

14.2 

12. 7 

1 1 

, 4 

3 

Sioux City_ 

100.0 

99.4 

34.6 

34.6 



63. 9 

10. 9 

8.7 

1.9 

3 

5 

Kansas: 











Kansas City___ 

100.0 

100.0 

12.7 

12.7 



86.2 

1.1 

.9 

.2 

f») 


Topeka..__ 

100.0 

99.3 

26.3 

26.3 



70.0 

3.0 

1 5 

1 4 

1 

7 

Wichita... 

100.0 

99.3 

28.7 

28.7 



68. 3 

2.3 

1.9 

•A 

(8) 

7 

Michigan: 











Detroit..__ 

100.0 

99.3 

27.2 

27.2 



48. 7 

23 4 

8 1 

16 1 


7 

Flint___ 

100.0 

99.9 

33. 1 

33.1 



43. 7 

23 1 

ifi 0 

7 0 


1 

Grand Rapids__ 

100.0 

99.7 

16.4 

16.4 



61. 3 

22.0 

14 2 

7 6 


’ 3 

Pontiac_ 

100.0 

99.9 

25.8 

25.8 



42. 2 

31 9 


^9 9 


1 

Saginaw_ 

100.0 

98.9 

24.8 

24.8 



43. 2 

30. 9 

18.7 

11.9 


Ll 

Minnesota: 










Duluth__ 

100.0 

99.1 

17.5 

17.5 



61.0 

20. 6 

16 ft 

6 


g 

Minneapolis__ ... 

100.0 

98.7 

30.6 

30.6 



48. 0 

20.1 

17 F, 

9 Ft 

1 

1 3 

St. Paul.... 

100.0 

99.3 

30.4 

30.4 



55. 4 

13. 6 

11.8 

1.5 


7 

Missouri: 











Kansas City_ 

100.0 

97.9 

11 9.7 

11 9.7 



71. 4 

16 8 

14 9 . 

5 

2,1 

11 2J. 

St. Louis_ ..._ 

100.0 

97.9 

15.0 

15.0 



74 0 

» Q 

6 q 

6 

] 4 

2.1 
1.9 

Nebraska: Omaha_ 

100.0 

98.1 

2.6 

2.6 



76. 7 

18.8 

13.7 

4.8 

.3 


See footnotes at end of table. 


128 




































































































































































Table C-20.-Peree„<„*e „f „/ p„Uic and private aaristanee and earnings under .peeified 

^ P^deral work programs, by urban area, 1957—Continued 


Geographic division, State, 
and urban areai 


Noeth Central—C on. 
Ohio: 

Akron.... 

Canton_ 

Cincinnati_ 

Cleveland_ 

Columbus.. 

Dayton_ 

Springfield_ 

Toledo__ 

Youngstown.. 

Wisconsin: 

Kenosha... 

Madison.. 

Milwaukee_ 

Racine___ 


South Atlantic and 
South Central 

Alabama; 

Birmingham... 

Mobile___ 

Delaware: Wilmington_ 

District of Columbia: Wash- 

ington.-.... 

Florida: 

Jacksonville___ 

Miami_ 

Georgia: Atlanta_ 

Kentucky: Louisville_ 

Louisiana: 

New Orleans__ 

Shreveport_ 

Maryland: Baltimore_ 

North Carolina; 

Asheville___ 

Charlotte__ 

Greensboro_ 

Winston-Salem.. 

Oklahoma; Tulsa_ 

South Carolina: Charleston.. 
Tennessee: 

Knoxville_ 

Memphis_ 

Nashville_ 

Texas: 

Dallas..... 

El Paso_ 

Fort Worth_ 

Houston_ 

San Antonio_ 

Virginia: 

Norfolk_ 

Richmond_ 

Roanoke___ 

West Virginia: Huntington.. 

Mountain and Pacific 
California: 

Los Angeles_ 

Oakland_ 

Sacramento_ 

San Diego__ 

San Francisco_ 

Colorado: Denver... 

Oregon: Portland.. 

Utah: Salt Lake City_ 

Washington: 

Seattle.... 

Tacoma 


Total 

public 


Public funds 


General relief ’ 


private 
funds 3 

Total 

Total 

Direct 

relief 

Work 

relief 

Civil 
Works 
Pro¬ 
gram * 

100.0 

99.5 

11.7 

11.3 

0.4 


100.0 

99.9 

17.6 

17.5 

. 1 


100.0 

98.1 

19.6 

19.0 

.6 


100. 0 

98. 5 

24.4 

23.6 

.8 


100.0 

99.6 

15. 2 

15.1 

. 1 


100.0 

99.8 

15.0 

14.8 

.2 


100.0 

99.7 

11.2 

11. 2 



100.0 

99.9 

15.9 

15.4 

. 5 


100.0 

99.9 

13.5 

13.5 



100.0 

99.8 

16.9 

16.9 



100.0 

99.8 

16. 2 

16.0 

.2 


100.0 

99.2 

19. 4 

19.4 



100.0 

99. 1 

17.8 

17.8 



100.0 

100.0 

1.7 

1.7 



100.0 

99.5 

.8 

.8 



100.0 

96.3 

17.5 

17.5 



100.0 

97.5 

14.4 

14.4 



100.0 

99.3 

3.3 

3.3 



100.0 

94.7 

6.8 

6.8 



100.0 

98.8 

8.3 

8.3 



100.0 

94.3 

» 8.5 

» 8.5 



100.0 

98.9 

5.4 

5.4 



100.0 

97.9 

26.8 

26.8 



100.0 

>3 97.1 

■317. 8 

>317.8 



100.0 

100.0 

8.1 

8.1 



100.0 

96.2 

6.2 

6.2 



100.0 

99.8 

14.0 

14.0 



100.0 

90. 7 

10.7 

10. 7 



100.0 

96.6 

2.6 

2.6 



100.0 

99.1 

2.1 

2.1 



100.0 

99.7 

9.0 

9.0 



100.0 

97.0 

4.5 

4.5 



100.0 

99.3 

9.7 

9. 7 



100.0 

98.3 

5.5 

5.5 



100.0 

99.4 

.2 

.2 



100.0 

99.8 

5.3 

5.2 

.1 


100.0 

99.1 

9.4 

9.4 



100.0 

98.4 





100.0 

98.5 

10.2 

10.2 



100.0 

94.1 

24.3 

24.3 



100.0 

100.0 

10.4 

10.4 



100.0 

99.5 

4.5 

4.5 



100.0 

99.5 

22.0 

22.0 



100.0 

99.7 

19.1 

19.1 



100.0 

99.3 

22.4 

22.4 



100.0 

99.8 

16.2 

16.2 



100.0 

98.6 

20. 9 

20. 9 



100.0 

99.6 

13. 5 

13. 5 



100.0 

99. 7 

16. 9 

16. 9 



100.0 

95.0 

19.3 

19.3 



100.0 

99.2 

21.8 

21.8 



100.0 

100.0 

15.5 

15.5 

_ 



Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 


Special types of public assistance « 


Projects 
iperated 
by the 
WPA5 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

children 

Aid to 
the 
blind 

. rnvaio 
funds 3 

74.2 

13.6 

11.4 

2.0 

0.2 

0. 5 

47. 7 

34.6 

29.7 

4.0 

.9 

. 1 

58.4 

20. 1 

16.2 

3.4 

.5 

1.9 

64.8 

9.3 

6.6 

2.5 

.2 

1. 5 

59.8 

24.6 

21.5 

2.4 

.7 

.4 

60. 1 

24.7 

21. 2 

2.9 

.6 

.2 

50. 7 

37.8 

33.4 

3.5 

.9 

.3 

68.0 

16.0 

14.3 

1.2 

.5 

, 1 

69.7 

16.7 

12.7 

3.5 

.5 

.1 

66.0 

16.9 

9.8 

6.3 

.8 

.2 

57.5 

26. 1 

20.0 

5. 5 

.6 

.2 

66.4 

13.4 

7.9 

5. 1 

.4 

.8 

55. 6 

25. 7 

17.0 

8.1 

.6 

.9 

86.5 

11.8 

5.8 

5.9 

.1 

(') 

87.6 

11.1 

7.7 

3.3 

.1 

.5 

59.8 

19.0 

13.1 

5.9 


3.7 

61.4 

21.7 

10.8 

10.2 

.7 

2.5 

83.9 

12.1 

9.5 

2.5 

.1 

.7 

59.2 

28.7 

21.6 

7.1 


5.3 

86.2 

4.3 

3.0 

1.2 

.1 

1.2 

70.6 

15.2 

10.7 

4.5 


11 5.7 

83.7 

9.8 

4.1 

5.6 

.1 

1.1 

13.7 

57.4 

31.0 

26.1 

.3 

2.1 

■3 47.3 

13 32.0 

1317.0 

1314.0 

13 1.0 

13 2.9 

86.2 

5.7 

4.1 

1.2 

.4 


84.7 

5.3 

3.1 

1.7 

.5 

3.8 

72.1 

13.7 

9.5 

3.1 

1.1 

.2 

75.6 

4.4 

2.8 

1.1 

.5 

9.3 

52.0 

42.0 

33.8 

6.7 

1.5 

3.4 

92.3 

4.7 

3.5 

1.0 

.2 

.9 

83.2 

7.5 

2.1 

5.3 

.1 

.3 

85.0 

7.5 

3.0 

4.1 

.4 

3.0 

84.5 

5.1 

2.2 

2.7 

.2 

.7 

56.3 

36.5 

35.9 

.6 


1.7 

76.3 

22.9 

22.9 



.6 

68.8 

25.7 

25.7 



.2 

57.0 

32.7 

32.1 

.6 


.9 

65.5 

32.9 

32.9 



1.6 

88.0 

.3 


.3 


1.5 

69.0 

.8 


.8 


5.9 

89.3 

.3 


.3 


84.1 

10.9 

8.2 

2.3 

.4 

.5 

53.1 

24.4 

20.3 

2.1 

2.0 

.5 

60.8 

19.8 

15.1 

'3.2 

1.5 

.3 

35.0 

41.9 

33.4 

6.1 

2.4 

.7 

59.6 

24.0 

21.4 

1.8 

.8 

.2 

61.1 

16.6 

13.3 

2.3 

1.0 

1.4 

39.6 

46.5 

40.8 

5.2 

.5 

.4 

'61.2 

21.6 

19.4 

1.4 

.8 

.3 

52.6 

23. 1 

17.0 

5.7 

.4 

5.0 

53.0 

24.4 

19.6 

4.1 

.7 

.8 

61.3 

23.2 

17.3 

5.2 

.7 



‘ See app. A for the territory included in each urban area. Percentages 
based on figures which relate to territory other than that shown for the area 
in app. A are footnoted. The entire percentage distribution is footnoted 
when the diflerence in coverage applies to earnings under one of the Federal 
work programs. 

* Figures on which these percentages are based exclude cost of administra¬ 
tion; of materials, equipment, and other items incident to operation of work 
programs; and of transient care. 

8 Figures on which these percentages are based include statutory aid to 
veterans administered on basis of need. 

* Terminated in 1934. 

> Figures from the WPA, Division of Statistics, on which these percentages 
are based represent earnings of persons employed on projects operated by the 
WPA within these areas; figures are not available for earnings of persons em¬ 
ployed on projects other than those operated by the WPA. 


» Figures on which these percentages are based include data for areas in 
States with plans approved by the Social Security Board and for areas in 
States not participating under the Social Security Act. 

^ Figures on which these percentages are based include direct and work 
relief and aid to veterans. 

* The percentage distribution is distorted to an unknown extent because 
figure for WPA relates to county. 

• Less than 0.1 percent. 

The percentage distribution is distorted to an unknown extent because 
figure for WPA relates to city. > 

>■ Figure on which this percentage is based relates to city. 

The percentage distribution is distorted to an unknown extent because 
figure for WPA relates to Baltimore County as well as the city of Baltimore. 


129 













































































































































































Table C-21 


I 

.—Percentage distribution of amount of public and private assistance and earnings under specified 

Federal work programs, by urban area, 1938 


Public funds 
Earnings under 


Geographic division, State, 
and urban area * 

Total 
public 
and 
private 
funds 2 

Total 

General relief 3 

Federal work 
programs 

Special types of public assistance ' 

Total 

Direct 
relief ‘ 

Work 
relief * 

Civil 
Works 
Pro¬ 
gram t 

Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA 6 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

chiidren 

Aid to 
the 
blind 

Total.... 

100. 0 

99.2 

22.7 




62. 7 

13.8 

9.9 

3. 3 

0.6 













New England 




\ 








Connecticut: 












Bridgeport__ 

• 100.0 

9 99.4 

«10. 7 




*82.3 

»6.4 

9 5.1 

•1.3 

(» 10) 

Hartford_ 

100. 0 

94. 8 

20. 0 




57. 9 

16. 9 

14.3 

2.4 

.2 

New Britain.. 

100. 0 

99. 7 

16. 6 




71. 4 

11. 7 

9.1 

2.5 

. 1 

New Haven_ 

«100. 0 

9 99. 2 

« 9. 9 




» 81. 4 

« 7.9 

9 6.6 

9 1. 2 

9. 1 

Maine: Portland... 

• 100. 0 

9 99.0 

«18. 6 




»68. 3 

9 12.1 

9 9.1 

•2.0 

9 1. 0 

Massachusetts: 












Boston_;_ 

100. 0 

97. 2 

17.6 




61.0 

18. 6 

12.3 

6.0 

.3 

Brockton_ 

100. 0 

98. 3 

15. 1 




59. 1 

24.1 

20. 9 

3.0 

.2 

Cambridge... 

100. 0 

98. 8 

24. 9 




56. 4 

17. 5 

11.6 

5.6 

.3 

Fall Kiver_ 

100. 0 

100. 0 

16.1 




65. 9 

18.0 

14.4 

3.4 

. 2 

Lawrence_ 

100. 0 

99.4 

20.5 




58.6 

20. 3 

17.7 

2.4 

.2 

Lowell__- 

100. 0 

99. 4 

19. 8 




61.4 

18. 2 

14.8 

3. 2 

.2 

Lynn_ 

100. 0 

99. 0 

14. 9 




69.4 

24. 7 

21. 6 

2. 9 

. 2 

Malden... 

100.0 

100. 0 

29. 6 




47.8 

22. 6 

19. 5 

2. 9 

.2 

New Bedford.. 

100. 0 

99. 5 

22. 0 




53. 2 

24. 3 

21. 3 

2. 8 

. 2 

Newton.... 

100. 0 

97.9 

33.3 




42. 2 

22. 4 

14.6 

7. 7 

. 1 

Springfield___ 

100. 0 

98.8 

29.9 




48. 7 

20. 2 

16. 5 

3.6 

. 1 

'Worcester___ 

100. 0 

99.1 

39. 7 




40. 2 

19. 2 

15. 0 

4. 0 

. 2 

Rhode Island: Providence_ 

«100. 0 

9 99. 4 

* 13.2 




“78.9 

«7. 3 

9 5.4 

9 1.9 


Middle Atlantic 












New Jersey: 












Jersey City__ 

« 100. 0 

999.9 

«18. 2 




«77. 7 

•4 0 

9 2. 0 

• 1.9 

9. 1 

Newark_ 

»100. 0 

999.8 

0 27. 6 




“ 66. 0 

* 6. 2 

9 2. 7 

9 3. 4 

9. 1 

Trenton... 

' 100.0 

*99.4 

' 20. 1 




* 72. 4 

9 6 9 

93.8 

9 2. 9 

9. 2 

New York: 











Albany.... 

' 100. 0 

9 99. 0 

' 17.1 




* 75. 0 

9 6 9 

« 5 2 

9 1 4 

» 3 

Bufialb_ 

100. 0 

99. 0 

49. 8 




39. 7 

9. 5 

6 7 

3. 5 

.3 

New Rochelle_ 

100.0 

99. 9 

60. 5 




23. 3 

16.1 

9.5 

6. 5 

. 1 

New York___ 

100. 0 

99.2 

32. 1 




56. 5 

10. 6 

5 . 8 

4. 6 

. 2 

Niagara Falls.. 

» 100. 0 

999 . 5 

“ 42. 5 




' 47. 6 

9 9. 4 

9 4. 7 

94 7 

(0 10) 

Rochester_ 

»100.0 

999.6 

^ 42. 7 




> 40. 7 

9 16. 2 

9 11 5 

• 4. 4 

9. 3 

Syracuse__ 

9 100. 0 

9 99. 2 

» 39.4 




« 49. 2 

9 10 6 

9 8 8 

9 1 7 

® 1 

Utica___ 

9 100. 0 

9 98. 8 

s 27. 9 




» 54. 8 

9 16. 1 

910. 6 

6 4 

6 1 

Yonkers.... 

100.0 

99.4 

31. 3 




56. 3 

11.8 

6.5 

6. 2 

[ 1 

Penns vlvania: 











Allentown_ 

100.0 

99.7 

14.1 




73. 0 

12 . 6 

8. 5 

2. 6 

1 6 

Altoona_ ... . .. . 

100.0 

100. 0 

20. 7 




65. 8 

13. 6 

91 

2 8 

1 6 

Bethlehem___ 

100. 0 

99. 7 

13. 7 




73. 8 

12 2 

7 ft 

2 ft 

1 4 

Chester.... 

100. 0 

99.6 

17. 0 




67. 5 

1.5 n 

10 0 

3 1 

1 ft 

Erie... 

100. 0 

100. 0 

16. 8 




67. 2 

16 0 

11 s 

S 0 

1 7 

Johnstown_ 

100. 0 

99.9 

21. 0 




66. 3 

12 6 

8. 0 

3 4 

1 2 

Philadelphia... 

100. 0 

99. 0 

53. 3 




34 3 

n 4 

7 S 

2 1 

L-5 

Pittsburgh... 

100.0 

99.4 

29.8 




60.1 

9 5 

o! 2 

2 4 

’ 9 

Reading_ __ 

100. 0 

99.7 

19. 1 




66. 4 

14 2 

ft ft 

2 S 

2, 0 

Scranton..... 

100.0 

99. 7 

12. 9 




79.4 

7 4 

4 6 

2. 2 

7 

Wilkes- B arre... 

100.0 

99.9 

18.2 




74 . 8 

6.9 

3.8 

2.3 

'.8 

North Central 








Illinois: 












Chicago.__ 

11 100. 0 

» 99.1 

11 27. 5 




•1 61 1 

11 in .5 

11 9 0 

11 g 

11 7 

Springfield.. 

100.0 

98.8 

24.4 




68.4 

leio 

13.5 

' 7 

1.8 

Indiana: 









Evansville... 

100.0 

9l8 

9.4 




78 9 

11 .5 

6 4 

4 7 

4 

Fort Wayne.... 

100.0 

99. 2 

7. 1 




76 4 

16 7 

S 7 

6 6 

5 

Indianapolis_ 

100. 0 

99.3 

12. 0 




73 3 

14 0 

S 1 

5 3 


South Bend_ 

100. 0 

99.8 

13. 5 




76 0 

10 2 

6 0 

4 1 

2 

Terre Haute.. 

100.0 

99.8 

4.6 




83. 9 

11.3 

7 ! 8 

3.1 

4 

Iowa: 









Des Moines... 

100.0 

99.8 

10.7 




73. 8 

16 S 

14 0 

5 

7 

Sioux City... 

100. 0 

99.6 

26.7 




66. 6 

16.2 

13.9 

1.8 

5 

Kansas: 









Kansas City.. 

100.0 

99.9 

9.2 




81. 0 

9 7 

6 6 

2J7 


Topeka_ 

100.0 

99.6 

9.6 




72. 7 

17 ^ 

10 9 

5 7 


Wichita_ 

100.0 

99.5 

18.4 




61.7 

19 ! 4 

13.3 

5.5 

.6 

Michigan: 







Detroit_ . 

100.0 

99.8 

21.6 




67 Q 

10 ^ 

4 4 

6 S 


Flint...... 

100.0 

99.9 

23. 2 




66 1 

10 (y 

7 6 

9 ft 


Grand Rapids... 

100. 0 

99.8 

8.9 




72. 4 

IS 6 

IS 6 

4 8 


Pontiac... 

100.0 

100.0 

22. 5 




64 n 

IS 6 

9 0 

4 4 


Saginaw... 

100.0 

99.7 

16.1 




66.3 

i7;3 

11.9 

5 ! 3 


Minnesota: 








Duluth___ 

100.0 

99.4 

17.2 




a 

16 Q 

13 6 

Q 0 


Minneapolis___ 

100.0 

99.4 

24.8 




66 Q 

17 7 

15 4 

2 1 


St. Paul.. 

100. 0 

99.4 

23.6 




63.3 

12 ! 5 

10.8 

1.5 


Missouri: 








Kansas City___ 

100.0 

98.6 

H 7.4 




74 2 

17 0 

1 

7 


St. Louis..... 

100.0 

98.9 

6.6 




si. 9 

ias 

8.3 

1.4 

.8 


Private 
funds • 


0.8 


».6 

5.2 
.3 
«.8 

« 1.0 

2.8 

1.7 

1.2 


( 10 ) 


( 10 ) 


2 . 

1 . 


0. 

o’ 

e’ 


« 1 . 

1 . 


o’ 

o’ 


0 . 

* i! 


( 10 ) • 

( 10 ) • 
i! 


». 9 

1.2 

.2 

.8 

.7 

.2 

.2 

.2 

.5 

.1 

.4 

.5 

.2 
. 1 
.2 

( 10 ) 

.3 

.6 

.6 

.6 

IS 1.4 

1.1 


See footnotes at end of table. 


130 


CO CO o *-• C« CO CO Oi to 00 O'00 >-* o O OibOH-* 0»<0t0s-‘0' 
























































































































































/ 


Table C—21 .—Percentage distribution of amount of public and private assistance and earnings under specified 


Federal work programs, by urban area, 1938 —Continued 


Public funds 


Geographic division, State, 
and urban area > 


North Central—C on. 

Nebraska: Omaha_ 

Ohio: 

Akron_ 

Canton_ 

Cincinnati_ 

Cleveland_ 

Columbus_ 

Dayton_ 

Springfield_ 

Toledo__ 

Youngstown... 

Wisconsin: 

Kenosha_ 

Madison___ 

Milwaukee_ 

Racine_ 

South Atlantic and 
South Central 

Alabama: 

Birmingham_ 

Mobile_ 

Delaware: Wilmington_ 

District of Columbia: Wash¬ 
ington_ 

Florida: 

Jacksonville... 

Miami... 

Georgia: Atlanta_ 

Kentucky: Louisville_ 

Louisiana: 

New Orleans___ 

Shreveport_ 

Maryland: Baltimore_ 

North Carolina: 

Asheville_ 

Charlotte_ 

Greensboro_ 

Winston-Salem_ 

Oklahoma: Tulsa_ 

South Carolina: Charleston.__ 
Tennessee: 

Knoxville_ 

Memphis_ 

Nashville_ 

Texas: 

Dallas_ 

El Paso_ 

Fort Worth__ 

Houston_ 

San .4,ntonio_ 

Virginia: 

Norfolk_ 

Richmond_ 

Roanoke_ 

West Virginia: Huntington... 

Mountain and Pacieic 
C alifornia: 

Los Angeles_ 

Oakland_ 

Sacramento_ 

San Diego_ 

San Francisco___ 

Colorado: Denver_ 

Oregon: Portland_ 

Utah: Salt Lake City_ 

Washington: 

Seattle_ 

Tacoma 


Total 
public 
and 
private 
funds 3 

Total 

General relief * 

Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 

Special types of public assistance ' 

Private 
funds * 

Total 

Direct 
relief * 

Work 
relief < 

Civil 
Works 
Pro¬ 
gram 3 

Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA3 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

children 

Aid to 
the 
blind 

100.0 

98.6 

1.0 




83.0 

14.6 

10.6 

3.7 

0.3 

1.4 

100.0 

99.8 

5.5 




86.3 

8.0 

6.1 

1.8 

,1 

.2 

100. 0 

100.0 

12.8 




71.5 

15.7 

13.3 

2.0 

.4 

(10) 

100. 0 

98.8 

19.3 




63.8 

15.7 

12.6 

2.7 

.4 

1.2 

100. 0 

99. 2 

10. 5 




82.7 

6.0 

4.0 

1.9 

.1 

.8 

100. 0 

99. 8 

11.8 




69.6 

18.4 

15.6 

2.2 

.6 

.2 

100. 0 

99. 8 

15. 5 




67.4 

16.9 

14.3 

2.2 

.4 

.2 

100. 0 

100. 0 

15. 9 




56.2 

27.9 

24.3 

2.8 

.8 


100.0 

100.0 

11. 5 




79.5 

9.0 

7.3 

1.4 

.3 

(10) 

100.0 

99. 9 

9.8 




79.7 

10.4 

7.8 

2.2 

,4 

.1 

100. 0 

99. 9 

14. 2 




72.6 

13.1 

7.2 

5.4 

.6 

.1 

100. 0 

99. 9 

9.5 




68.5 

21.9 

15.5 

6.0 

.4 

.1 

100.0 

99. 4 

17.4 




70.9 

11.1 

6.7 

4.0 

.4 

.6 

100. 0 

99. 6 

18.0 




63.4 

18.1 

10.8 

7.0 

.3 

.5 

100.0 

100.0 

1.2 




90.4 

8.4 

4.0 

4.3 

.1 

(10) 

100 0 

99. 7 

.8 




91.0 

7.9 

6.3 

1.5 

.1 

.3 

mo 0 

97.6 

17.4 




66.7 

13.5 

8.3 

5.2 


2.4 

100.0 

97.9 

6.7 




72.7 

18.5 

10.5 

7.3 

.7 

2.1 

100.0 

99. 7 

2.0 




82.8 

14.9 

12.9 

1.4 

.6 

.3 

100.0 

97.0 

4.0 




60.9 

32.1 

26.4 

4.8 

.9 

3.0 

100.0 

99.3 

3.8 




87.9 

7.6 

4.7 

2.6 

.3 

.7 

mo n 

U7 7 

13 5.9 




82.6 

9.2 

7.0 

2.2 


13 2.3 

100.0 

99.1 

4.1 




84.5 

10.5 

4.4 

6.9 

.2 

.9 

100.0 

98.9 

19.6 




26.0 

53.3 

28.1 

24.6 

.6 

1.1 

13100. 0 

13 97.9 

13 21.6 




13 38.6 

13 37. 7 

13 19.3 

13 17.4 

13 1.0 

13 2.1 

mn 0 

mn n 

2 4 




83.9 

13.7 

9.1 

3.9 

.7 


100. 0 

99.3 

6. 8 




71.9 

20.6 

13.4 

6.8 

1.4 

.7 

100 0 

100 0 

2.0 




69.9 

28.1 

18.3 

8.3 

1.6 

(10) 

100. 0 

94.9 

4. 5 




74.6 

15.8 

10.6 

4.2 

1.0 

6.1 

100 0 

97 2 

3.6 




57.2 

36.4 

28.1 

7.2 

1.1 

2.8 

100 0 

99. 7 

2.0 




86.8 

10.9 

7.6 

2.9 

.4 

.3 

100.0 

99. 7 

3.1 




75.2 

21.4 

10.7 

10.1 

.6 

.3 

100.0 

98.3 

.8 




71.6 

25.9 

15.8 

8.6 

1.6 

1.7 

100 0 

99.3 

1.8 




74.2 

23.3 

12.7 

9.4 

1.2 

.7 

mn n 

QS 7 

6 3 




66.0 

26.4 

26.1 

.3 


1.3 

inn 0 

QQ Ft 

9 




83.8 

15.5 

15.5 



.5 

inn n 

QQ Q 

Ft 4 




73.6 

20.9 

20.9 



.1 

100 0 

99 1 

8.9 




66.9 

23.3 

23.3 



.9 

inn 0 

QR 7 




75.5 

23.2 

23.2 



1.3 

mo 0 

98 9 

6. 2 




92.1 

.6 

.2 

.3 

.1 

1.1 

mn 0 

95 7 

20.0 




73.7 

2.0 

1.2 

.7 

.1 

4.3 

100 0 

mo 0 

9 9 




88.7 

1.4 

.6 

.6 

.2 


mn n 

99! fi 

5. 5 




86.2 

7.9 

5.1 

2.5 

.3 

.4 

inn n 

99 Ft 

26. 6 




39.2 

33.7 

28.2 

2.9 

2.6 

.6 

mn n 

99 7 

18.3 




61.3 

20.1 

15.5 

3.1 

1.6 

.3 

mn n 

99 4 

19.7 




37.6 

42.1 

33.9 

6.8 

2.4 

.6 

inn 0 

99 9 

17.9 




49.4 

32.6 

28.6 

2.8 

1.2 

.1 

inn n 

99 0 

18.9 




61.8 

18.3 

15.0 

2.2 

1.1 

1.0 

mo n 

99 n 

8.9 




45.6 

45.1 

39.6 

5.1 

.4 

.4 

mn 0 

99 7 

16 2 




59.7 

23.8 

21.0 

2.1 

.7 

.3 

100 0 

90 4 

9 5 




56.4 

30.5 

23.8 

6.4 

.3 

3.6 

ion 0 

99 Ft 

13 7 




62.0 

23.8 

19.8 

3.3 

.7 

.6 

100.0 

mo 

9.5 




69.8 

20.7 

16.4 

3.8 

.5 



1 See app. A for the territory included in each urban area. Percentages 
based on figures which relate to territory other than that shown for the area 
in app. A are footnoted. The entire percentage distribution is footnoted when 
the diflerence in coverage applies to earnings under one of the Federal work 
programs. , , ^ j * 

> Figures on which these percentages are based exclude cost of administra¬ 
tion; of materials, equipment, and other items incident to operation of work 
programs; and of transient care. . .... 

3 Figures on yyhieh these percentages are based include statutory aid to 
veterans administered on basis of need. 

< Figures not available. 

* Terminated in 1934. . . , . , t 

3 Figures from the W^PA, Division of Statistics, on which these percenta^s 
are based represent earnings of persons employed on projects operated by 
the WPA within these areas; figures are not available for earnings of persons 
employed on projects other than those operated by the WPA. 


3 Figures on which these percentages are based include data for areas in 
States with plans approved by the Social Security Board and for areas in 
States not participating under the Social Security Act. 

* Figures on which these percentages are based include direct and work 
relief and aid to veterans. 

9 The percentage distribution is distorted to an unknown extent because 
figure for WPA relates to county. 

10 Less than 0.1 percent. 

11 The percentage distribution is distorted to an unknown extent because 
figure for WPA relates to city. 

19 Figure on which this percentage is based relates to city. 

13 The percentage distribution is distorted to an unknown extent because 
figure for WPA relates to Baltimore County as well as the city of Baltimore. 


131 






























































































































































Table C—22 .—Amount per inhabitant^ of public and private assistance and earnings under specified Federal work 

programs, by urban area, 1929 


Public funds 


Geographic division, State, 
and urban area > 

Total 
public 
and 
private 
funds 5 

Total 

General relief ‘ 

Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 

Special types of public assistance 

Private 
funds i 

Total 

Direct 

relief 

Work 

relief 

Civil 
Works 
Pro¬ 
gram « 

Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA 6 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

, Aid to 
'depend¬ 
ent 

children 

Aid to 
the blind 

Median *... 

$0.87 

$0.66 

.$0. 29 

$0.30 

(») 



$0. 31 

(') 

$0.29 

$0.04 

$0.16 

New England 













Connecticut: 













Bridgeport__ 

.99 

.77 

.53 

.53 




.24 


.23 

.01 

. 22 

Hartford___ 

2.09 

.86 

.56 

.56 




.30 


.28 

.02 

1.23 

New Britain_ 

1.11 

1.03 

.59 

.59 




.44 


.44 

(10) 

.08 

New Haven_ 

1.23 

.81 

.30 

.30 




.51 


.50 

.01 

.42 

Maine: Portland... 

1.61 

1.34 

1.07 

1.07 




.27 


.18 

.09 

,27 

Massachusetts: 













Boston... _ 

4.19 

3. 50 

2.54 

2.54 




.96 


.91 

.05 

.69 

Brockton_ 

3.41 

2. 66 

2.24 

2.24 




.42 


.37 

.05 

.75 

Cambridge_ 

3. 54 

3.23 

2.37 

2.37 




.86 


.79 

.07 

.31 

Fall River_ 

2. 79 

2. 77 

2.54 

2. 54 




.23 


.19 

.04 

.02 

Lawrence_ 

2.34 

2.19 

1.73 

1. 73 




.46 


.45 

.01 

. 15 

Lowell_ 

4.14 

3.68 

2. 63 

2. 63 




1.05 


1.00 

.05 


Lynn_ 

2.47 

2.03 

1.58 

1.58 




.45 


.43 

.02 

44 

Malden-- 

2.09 

2.07 

1.89 

1.89 




.18 


. 15 

.03 

02 

New Bedford_ 

3. 43 

3.29 

3.03 

3.03 




.26 


. 23 

.03 

14 

Newton_ 

1.11 

.97 

.53 

.53 




.44 


.43 

.01 

. 14 

Springfield_ 

1.72 

1.34 

1.09 

1.09 




.25 


.23 

.02 

38 

Worcester__ 

2.83 

2. 57 

2.17 

2.17 




. 40 


.36 

.04 

96 

Rhode Island: Providence_ 

.71 

.52 

.21 

.21 




.31 


.31 


.19 

Middle Atlantic 













New Jersey: 













Jersey City_ 

.74 

.71 

.19 

.19 




.62 


- .51 

.01 

03 

Newark _ 

1.16 

.97 

.53 

.53 




.44 


.43 

.01 

19 

Trenton.____ 

1.27 

1.23 

.53 

.53 




.70 


.67 

.03 

.04 

New York: 










Albany.. _ 

1.35 

.79 

.40 

.40 




.39 


3.5 

04 

56 

Buffalo__ 

1.89 

1.60 

1.18 

1.18 




. 42 


40 

02 

’99 

New Rochelle_ 

.43 

.36 

.20 

.20 




. 16 


14 

02 

07 

New York_ 

1.41 

1.10 

.12 

.12 




.98 


95 

03 

31 

Niagara Palls_ 

1.28 

.99 

.54 

.54 




.45 


44 

01 

* ?9 

Rochester__ 

2. 80 

2.26 

1.98 

1.98 




. 28 


25 

03 

54 

Syracuse___ 

1.02 

.82 

.58 

.58 




. 24 


23 

01 

20 

Utica. _ ___ . 

1.13 

.82 

.41 

.41 




. 41 


38 

03 

31 

Yonkers__ 

1.19 

.98 

.29 

.29 




. 69 


.67 

.02 

.21 

Pennsylvania: 










Allentown_ 

.35 

.28 

.04 

.04 




.24 


24 


.-07 

Altoona.. _ 

.64 

.52 

.23 

.23 




.29 


29 



Bethlehem_ 

.67 

.56 

.32 

.32 




. 24 


24 



Chester_ 

.33 

.26 

.10 

.10 

/ 



. 16 


16 


07 

Erie.... 

.57 

.43 

.18 

.18 




. 25 


95 


14 

Johnstown_ 

.82 

.80 

.54 

.54 




.26 


26 


QO 

Philadelphia..... 

.76 

.33 

.04 

.04 




. 29 


. 29 


43 

Pittsburgh_ 

.56 

.40 

.11 

.11 




.29 


29 


16 

Reading_ 

.61 

.44 

.12 

.12 




.32 


32 


17 

Scranton_ 

1.09 

.85 

.52 

.62 




.33 


33 


24 

Wilkes-Barre__ 

1.09 

1.05 

.80 

.80 




.25 


2.5 


.04 

North Central 












Illinois: 













Chicago_ 

.72 

.47 

.12 

.12 




.35 


27 

08 


Springfield.. 

.86 

.75 

.23 

.23 




.52 


.17 

.35 


Indiana: 









Evansville_ 

1.09 

1.04 

.97 

.97 




.07 


07 



Fort Wayne.... 

.45 

.25 

.19 

.19 




.06 


06 


20 

Indianapolis___ 

..54 

.29 

.25 

.25 




.04 


04 


25 

South Bend_ 

.42 

.33 

.22 

.22 




.11 


n 


09 

Terre Haute_ 

1.16 

1.05 

.93 

.93 




.12 


12 


.11 

Iowa: 












Des Moines___ 

1.16 

.84 

.36 

.36 




.48 


33 



Sioux City_ 

.91 

.63 

.22 

.22 




.41 


.32 

.09 

.28 

Kansas: 









Kansas City_ 

.33 

.21 

.21 

.21 




(10) 





Topeka_ 

.92 

.89 

.77 

.77 




. 12 


1 ? 

. 


Wichita_ _ 

.64 

.48 

.40 

.40 




.08 


.08 


.16 

Michigan: 











Detroit.. 

1.68 

1.59 

1.01 

1.01 




.58 


58 



Flint___ 

1.02 

.87 

.33 

.33 




. 54 


54 



Grand Rapids_ 

.57 

.52 

.17 

.17 




.35 


35 



Pontiac___ 

1.30 

1.25 

.68 

.68 




,57 


57 



Saginaw_ 

1.50 

1.35 

.73 

.73 




.62 


.62 


.15 

Minnesota: 











Duluth... 

1.58 

1.42 

.45 

.45 




Q7 





Minneapolis.. 

.83 

.57 

.16 

.16 




41 



. 03 

, 16 

St. Paul_ 

1.42 

1.03 

.42 

.42 




.61 


.68 

.03 

. 26 
.39 

Missouri: 









Kansas City_ 

.59 

.20 










» .39 

St. Louis_ 

.51 1 

.21 

(10) 

(10) 




.21 


.06 

.16 

See footnotes at end of table. 




. 30 


132 


































































































































































































































































Table C-22.—Amount per inhabitant^ of public and private assistance and earnings underspecified Federal woik 

programs, by urban area, 1929 —Continued 


Geographic division. State, 
and urban area * 

Total 
public 
and 
private 
funds > 


Public funds 

] 

1 

Private 
funds > 

Total 

G 

eneral reli( 

;f ‘ 

Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 

Special types of public assistance 

Total 

Direct 

relief 

Work 

relief 

Civil 
Works 
Pro¬ 
gram • 

Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA 9 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

children 

Aid to 
the blind 

North Central—C on. 

i 












Nebraska: Omaha. 

$0.87 

$0. 61 

$0.26 

$0.26 




$0.25 


$0.23 

$0.02 

$0.36 

Ohio: 








Akron.. . 

.64 

.44 

, 22 

.22 




. 22 


18 



Canton.. 

.94 

.77 

J25 

.25 




. 62 


26 

26 


Cincinnati.. . 

.98 

.64 

. 19! 

.12 

(10) 



. 52 


42 

10 


Cleveland_ 

1.02 

.54 

.09 

.09 



.45 

7 

40 

05 


Columbus. 

.89 

.78 


.22 




. 56 


39 

17 


Dayton_ 

.89 

.56 

J22 

.22 




. 34 


23 



Springfield-. 

.61 

.30 

. 09 

.09 




. 21 


17 

04 

^1 

Toledo... 

.70 

.63 

9R 

.28 




.35 


30 



Youngstown_ 

1.00 

.76 

.33 

.33 




.43 


.33 

.10 

.24 

Wisconsin: 









Kenosha___ 

1.91 

1.38 

88 

.88 




.50 


41 

OQ 

63 

Madison.. 

1.32 

1.27 


.65 




.62 


60 

no 


Milwaukee... 

1.06 

.81 


.27 




.54 


40 

08 

24 

Racine.__ 

1.31 

1.16 

.44 

.44 




.72 


.56 

.16 

.15 

South Atlantic and South 









Central 













Alabama: 













Birmingham__ 

.16 











, 15 

Mobile__ 

.07 











07 

Delaware: Wilmington _ 

.46 

.32 






.32 


.32 


.14 

District of Columbia: Wash- 












ington_ _ 

.61 

.23 

.01 

.01 




.22 


22 


.38 

Florida: 











Jacksonville_ 

.74 

.70 

28 

.28 




.42 


.42 


,04 

Miami__ 

.86 

.64 


.28 




.36 


.36 


, 22 

Georgia: Atlanta_ 

.29 

.23 

.23 

.23 







' no 

Kentucky: Louisville. 

.50 

.16 





.16 

(10) 

. 11 

" .05 

>1.34 

Louisiana: 











New Orleans___ 

.28 

.01 






.01 



.01 

, 27 

Shreveport___ 

.23 

.04 

.02 

.02 




.02 


.02 


- 19 

Maryland: Baltimore. 

.43 

.06 

.06 

.06 








.37 

North Carolina: 












Asheville__ 

.24 

.03 






.03 


.03 


.21 

Charlotte..__ . ... 

.22 

.07 

. 04 

.04 




.03 


.03 


.16 

Greensboro.. . 

.30 

.29 

2fi 

.26 




.03 


.03 


.01 

Winston-Salem_ 

.40 

. 11 

. OS 

.08 




.03 


.03 


.29 

Oklahoma: Tulsa_ 

.80 

.68 

. fiS 

.63 




.05 


.05 


. 12 

South Carolina: Charleston_ 

.13 

.08 

.08 

.08 








.05 

Tennessee: 













Knoxville_ 

.13 

.03 






.03 


.03 


. 10 

Memphis_ 

.41 

.13 






.13 


.13 


.28 

Nashville.. 

.10 

.04 

.04 

.04 








.06 

Texas: 












Dallas_.'_ 

.30 

.18 

in 

. 10 




.08 


.08 


.12 

El Paso_ 

. 17 

.11 

. 11 

.11 








.06 

Fort Worth_ 

.39 

.36 


.36 








.03 

Houston_ 

.21 

.09 

. 

05 

.05 




.04 


.04 


.12 

San Antonio.__ 

. 12 

.03 

.03 

.03 








.09 

Virginia: 












Norfolk____ 

.30 

.14 

. 14 

. 14 








.16 

Richmond_ 

.59 

.16 

. 11 

.11 




.05 


.05 


.43 

Roanoke___ 

.20 

.08 

.08 

.08 








.12 

West Virginia: Huntington_ 

.27 

.16 

.07 

.07 




.09 


.09 


,11 

Mountain and Pacific 













California: 













Los Angeles_ 

1.04 

.94 

.76 

.76 




.18 


.16 

.02 

.10 

Oakland_ 

1.71 

1.58 

.62 

.62 




.96 


.91 

.05 

.13 

Sacramento.... 

1.04 

.88 

.27 

.27 




.61 


.45 

.16 

.16 

San Diego_ 

.90 

.68 

. 42 

.42 




.26 


.24 

.02 

.22 

San Francisco_ .. 

1.50 

.87 

. 03 


$0.03 



.84 


.80 

.04 

.63 

Colorado: Denver_ 

1.36 

1.00 

. 51 

.51 



.49 


.35 

.14 

.36 

Oregon: Portland_ 

. 74 

.58 

.39 

.39 




. 19 


.19 


.16 

Utah: Salt Lake City_ 

1.43 

.61 

.31 

.31 




.30 

$0.04 

.26 


.82 

Washington: 













Seattle__ 

.77 

.61 

.32 

.31 

.01 



.29 


.29 


. 16 

Tacoma__- 

.69 

.61 

.26 

.26 




.35 


.35 


.08 


> Based on total population of areas estimated from U. S. censuses of 1920 
and 1930. 

> See app. A for the territory and total population included in each urban 
area. Amounts per inhabitant based on figures which relate to territory 
other than that shown in app. A are footnoted. 

* Excludes cost of administration; of materials, equipment, and other items 
incident to operation of work programs; and of transient care. 

* Includes statutory aid to veterans administered on basis of need. 


* Not initiated until 1933. 

« Not initiated until 1936, 

^ Includes direct and work relief and aid to veterans. 

» Based on number of areas reporting expenditures for specified type of aid. 

* Not computed because of small number of areas. 

Less than 1 cent. 

» Relates to city. 


133 



















































































































































































































Table C--23 .—Amoxint per inhabitant ^ of public and private assistance and earnings under specific d Federal work 

programs, by urban area, 1930 


Public funds 


Geographic division, State, 
and lu'ban area > 

Total 
public 
and 
private 
funds ’ 

Total 

General relief ♦ 

Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 

Special types of public assistance 

Private 
funds ^ 

Total 

Direct 

relief 

Work 

relief 

Civil 
Works 
Pro¬ 
gram * 

Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA « 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

children 

Aid to 
the blind 

Median *____ 

$1.09 

$0.85 

$0. 46 

$0.44 

(») 



$0.35 

W 

$0. 32 

$0. 05 

$0. 24 

New England 













Connecticut: 













Bridgeport 

3.35 

2. 99 

2. 72 

1.03 

$1.69 



.27 


.27 

(10) 

.36 

Hartford 

3.49 

2.43 

2.09 

1.89 

.20 



.34 


.33 

.01 

1.06 

New Britain 

1. 72 

1. 57 

1.12 

1.12 




.45 


.45 

(10) 

.15 

New Haven 

1. 88 

1. 32 

. 78 

. 53 

.25 



.54 


.52 

.02 

.56 

Maine: Portland 

1.93 

1.66 

1.41 

1.41 




.25 


.16 

.09 

.27 

Massachusetts: 













Boston 

5.98 

5.18 

4.18 

4.18 




1.00 


.96 

.05 

.80 

Brockton 

4.48 

3. 65 

3. 23 

2.80 

.43 



.42 


.36 

.06 

.83 

Cambridge 

4.27 

3. 90 

2. 96 

2.96 




.94 


.86 

.08 

.37 

Tlivp.r 

4.87 

4.85 

4. 48 

4.48 




.37 


.32 

.05 

.02 

Tiawrpnnft 

3. 50 

3. 25 

2.73 

2. 73 




.52 


.50 

.02 

.25 

Lowell 

4.92 

4.33 

3. 33 

3.33 




1.00 


.95 

.05 

.59 

Lynn . _ 

3. 50 

2. 82 

2.27 

2. 27 




.55 


.53 

.02 

.68 

Malden_ . 

2.73 

2. 71 

2. 53 

2. 53 




. 18 


.15 

.03 

.02 

New Bedford __ .. 

5. 70 

5. 48 

5.06 

5. 06 




.42 


.38 

.04 

.22 

Newton __ 

1.46 

1.23 

.80 

.80 




.43 


.42 

.01 

.23 

Springfield 

3.38 

2.79 

2. 54 

2. 54 




.25 


.23 

.02 

.69 

W orcester _ 

4.02 

3. 66 

3.24 

3.24 




.42 


.38 

.04 

.36 

Rhode Island: Providence 

.92 

.62 

. 30 

.30 




.32 


.32 


.30 

Middle Atlantic 













New Jersey: 













Jersey City_ 

.93 

.89 

.28 

.28 




.61 


.60 

.01 

.04 

Newark_ 

1.82 

1.53 

1.02 

1.02 




.61 


.60 

.01 

.29 

Trenton_ 

1.72 

1.50 

.63 

. 63 




.87 


.84 

.03 

.22 

New York: 













Albany.. 

1. 79 

1.12 

.70 

.70 




.42 


.37 

.05 

.67 

Buffalo_ 

2. 89 

2. 54 

2.10 

1. 99 

.11 



.44 


.42 

.02 

.35 

New Rochelle_ 

.61 

.52 

.35 

.35 




.17 


.16 

.01 

.09 

New York _ 

2.03 

1.31 

.25 

.25 




1.06 


1.03 

.03 

.72 

Niagara Falls_ 

2. 72 

2.31 

1. 70 

1. 50 

.20 



.61 


.60 

.01 

.41 

Rochester_ 

4.62 

4.00 

'' 3.65 

3. 42 

.23 



.35 


.32 

.03 

.62 

Syracuse_ 

1.77 

1.51 

1.24 

1.24 




.27 


.25 

.02 

.26 

litica_ 

1. 75 

1.19 

.62 

.62 




.57 


. 53 

.04 

.56 

Yonkers_ 

1.79 

1.32 

.60 

.60 




.72 


.70 

.02 

.47 

Pennsylvania: 













Allentown_ 

.37 

.29 

.08 

.08 




.21 


.21 


.08 

Altoona_ 

.61 

46 

.19 

.19 




.27 


.27 


.15 

Bethlehem__ 

.85 

.71 

.49 

.49 




.22 


.22 


.14 

Chester_ 

.45 

.32 

.15 

. 15 




. 17 


. 17 


. 13 

Erie _ 

.74 

.47 

.23 

.23 




.24 


.24 


.27 

Johnstown_ 

.91 

.85 

. 53 

.53 




.32 


.32 


.06 

Philadelphia. _ 

.89 

.35 

.05 

.05 




.30 


.30 


.54 

Pittsburgh_ 

.80 

.52 

.24 

.24 




.28 


.28 


.23 

Reading!_ 

.81 

.48 

.20 

.20 




.28 


. 28 


.33 

Scranton_ 

1.11 

.88 

.54 

.54 




.34 


.34 


.23 

Wilkes-Barre_ 

1.15 

1.11 

.78 

.78 




.33 


.33 


.04 

North Central 













Hllnois: 













Chicago___ 

1.00 

.59 

.24 

.24 




.35 


.25 

. 10 

.41 

Springfield__ 

1.14 

.97 

.34 

.34 






.19 

.44 

. 17 

Indiana: 













Evansville_ 

1.62 

1.42 

1.30 

1.30 




. 12 


. 12 


.20 

Fort Wayne _ ... 

.66 

.42 

.35 

. 35 




.07 


.07 


.24 

Indianapolis___ 

1.09 

.72 

.68 

.68 




.04 


.04 


.37 

South Bend_ 

.99 

.85 

.72 

.72 




. 13 


. 13 


. 14 

Terre Haute_ 

1.31 

1.15 

1.03 

1.03 




. 12 


. 12 


. 16 

Iowa: 













Des Moines ... 

1.39 

1.00 

.50 

.50 




. 50 


. 35 

15 

39 

Sioux City _ 

.95 

.71 

.30 

.30 




.41 


.31 

. 10 

.24 

Kansas: 













Kansas City_ 

.36 

.22 

.22 

.22 




(10) 


(10) 


14 

Topeka..__ 

.93 

.92 

.80 

.80 




. 12 


. 12 


ni 

Wichita___ 

.76 

.59 

.52 

.52 




.07 


.07 


.17 

Michigan: 












Detroit. _ 

5. 47 

5.30 

4. 66 

4. 66 




.64 


. 64 


17 

Flint_ 

2. 29 

2.09 

1.49 

1.49 




.60 


. 60 


90 

Grand Rapids_ 

.97 

.85 

.45 

.45 




.40 


.40 


19 

Pontiac_ 

2.96 

2. 93 

2.35 

2.35 




. 58 


. 58 


0'^ 

Saginaw__ 

2. 30 

2.07 

1.34 

1.34 




.73 


.73 


.23 

Minnesota: 











Duluth..___ 

1.89 

1. 70 

.70 

.70 




1. 00 


Q7 

03 


Minneapolis_ 

.96 

.65 

.25 

.25 




.40 



09 


St. Paul. _ 

1.54 

1.17 

.53 

.63 




.64 


.60 

.04 

.37 


See footnotes at end of table. 


134 









































































































































































































































Table C—23..—Amount per inhabitant ' of public and private assistance and earnings under specified Federal work, 

programs, by urban area, 1930 —Continued 


Public funds 


4 

Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 

Special types of public assistance 

Private 
funds 1 

Work 

relief 

Civil 
Works 
Pro¬ 
gram 3 

Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA 3 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

children 

Aid to 
the blind 





$0.22 


$0.06 

$0.17 

11 $0.44 




.19 


.04 

.16 

.35 




.36 


.32 

.03 

.33 




.21 


.17 

.04 

.42 




.60 


.32 

.28 

.60 

$0.14 

.60 



.51 


.41 

.10 

.60 



.46 


.41 

.05 

.98 



.58 


.39 

.19 

.17 




.35 


.24 

.11 

1.06 




.23 


.19 

.04 

.43 




.36 


.29 

.07 

.20 



.36 


.27 

.09 

.56 




.93 

$0.21 

.62 

.10 

.88 




.75 

.68 

.07 

.08 

.13 



.71 

.09 

.54 

.08 

.38 



.73 


.66 

.17 

.25 






.18 








.09 




.33 


.33 


.22 




.24 


.24 


.61 




.40 


.40 


.04 




.38 


.38 


.21 






.08 

11 .06 



.24 

.01 

.17 

11 .06 

11 .34 



.01 



.01 

.28 




.03 


.02 

.01 

.29 




.05 


.03 

.02 

.45 




.02 


.02 


.28 




.02 


.02 


.28 

.13 



.02 


.02 


.01 



.02 


.02 


.38 




.05 


.05 


.16 






.05 




.06 


.06 


.24 




.13 


.13 


.42 







.08 




.08 


.08 


.13 

.07 













.03 




.04 


.04 


.16 






.11 

.05 







.14 



.05 


.05 


.52 






.23 




.06 


.05 


.16 




.35 

.14 

.15 

.06 

.11 




1.61 

.48 

.87 

.16 

.11 




1.20 

.58 

.46 

.17 

.17 

.03 



.72 

.43 

.22 

.07 

.10 

.43 



1.11 

.28 

.74 

.09 

.63 



.48 


.35 

.13 

.35 

.09 



.19 


.19 


.19 



.61 

.36 

.26 


.97 

.05 



.30 


.30 


.15 



.40 


.40 


.09 









Geographic division, State, 
and urban area > 


North Central—C on. 
Missouri: 

Kansas City_ 

St. Louis..__ 

Nebraska: Omaha_ 

Ohio: 

Akron_ 

Canton...__ 

Cincinnati_ 

Cleveland..__ 

Columbus_ 

Dayton_ 

Springfield.. 

Toledo___ 

Youngstown_ 

Wisconsin: 

Kenosha_ 

Madison.. 

Milwaukee_ 

Racine_ 


South Atlantic and South 
Central 

Alabama: 

Birmingham__ 

Mobile_ 

Delaware: Wilmington_ 

District of Columbia: Wash¬ 
ington_ 

Florida: 

Jacksonville-__ 

Miami_ 

Georgia: Atlanta_ 

Kentucky: Louisville_ 

Louisiana: 

New Orleans_ 

Shreveport___ 

Maryland: Baltimore_ 

North Carolina: 

Asheville_ 

Charlotte_ 

Greensboro__ 

Winston-Salem_ 

Oklahoma: Tulsa_ 

South Carolina: Charleston.. 
Tennessee: 

Knoxville... 

Memphis___ 

Nashville_ 

Texas: 

Dallas..-. 

El Paso__ 

Fort Worth_ 

Houston.. 

San Antonio. 

Virginia: 

Norfolk_ 

Richmond..-- 

Roanoke--- 

West Virginia: Huntington.. 

Mountain and Pacific 
California: 

Los Angeles.... 

Oakland___ 

Sacramento..-- 

San Diego.... 

San Francisco_ 

Colorado: Denver- 

Oregon: Portland_ 

Utah; Salt Lake City... 

Washington:. 

Seattle--- 

Tacoma_ 


Total 
public 
and 
private 
funds s 


$ 0.66 
.55 
.98 

1.09 

1.56 

1.28 

2.15 

1.16 
1.67 

.87 

2.13 

1.30 

3.95 
1.51 
2.45 
2.53 


Total 


.76 

.74 

.86 

.34 

.75 

.29 

.35 

.68 

.30 

.38 

.49 

.48 

.54 

.15 

.30 

.65 

.13 

.33 

.18 

.47 

.25 

.14 

.33 

.71 

.30 

.28 


1.51 
2. 61 
1.83 
1.57 
2.17 
1.13 
.90 
1.90 

.87 

.85 


$ 0 . 22 
.20 
.65 

.67 

.96 

.78 

1.17 

.99 

.61 

.44 

1.93 

.74 

3.07 

1.43 

2.07 

2.28 


1.40 
2. 50 
1.66 
1.47 
1.54 
.78 
.71 
.93 

.72 

.76 


General relief * 


Total 


$ 0.01 

.30 

.46 

.36 

.27 

.71 

.41 

.26 

.21 

1.57 

.38 

2.14 

.68 

1.36 

1.65 


.01 


.01 

.30 
.27 
.26 
>1 .17 

( 10 ) 

.03 

.08 


.08 

.46 

.08 

.3:i 

.10 


.05 

.12 

.11 

.44 

.05 

.03 

.19 

.14 

.07 

.07 


1.05 

.99 

.46 

.75 

.43 

.30 

.52 

.32 

.42 

.36 


Direct 

relief 


$ 0.01 

.30 

.46 

.36 

.13 

.11 

.41 

.26 

.21 

1.37 

.38 

2.14 

.68 

1.23 

1.55 


.01 


.01 

.30 
.27 
.26 
11 .11 

( 10 ) 

.03 

.08 


.08 

.33 

.08 

.33 

.10 


.05 

.12 

.11 

.44 

.05 

.03 

.14 

.14 

.07 

.07 


1.05 

.99 

.46 

.72 


.30 

.43 

.32 

.37 

.36 


1 Based on total population of areas according to U. S. census of 1930. 
a See app. A for the territory and total population included in each urban 
area. Amounts per inhabitant based on figures which relate to territory 
other than that shown in app. A are footnoted. 

3 Excludes cost of administration; of materials, equipment, and other items 
Incident to operation of work programs; and of transient care. 

* Includes statutory aid to veterans administered on basis of need. 


3 Not initiated until 1933. 

• Not initiated until 1935. 

3 Includes direct and work relief and aid to veterans. 

* Based on number of areas reporting expenditures for specified typo of aid. 
«Not computed because of small number of areas. 

I" Less than 1 cent. 

11 Relates to city. 


135 




































































































































































































Table C—24 .—Amount per inhabitant ^ of public and private assistance and earnings under specified Federal work 

programs, by urban area, 1931 


Public funds 


Geographic division, State, 
and urban area * 

T otal 
public 
and 
private 
funds ’ 

Total 

General relief * 

Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 

Special types of public assistance 

Private 
funds 1 

Total 

Direct 

relief 

Work 

relief 

Civil 
Works 
Pro¬ 
gram ® 

Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA « 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

children 

Aid to 
the blind 

Median *. _ 

$2. 36 

$1.62 

$1.25 

$0.92 

$0. 42 



$0.41 

$0.27 

$0. 34 

$0.05 

$0. 45 

New England 













Connecticut: 













Bridgeport_ _ 

5. 61 

5. 01 

4. 72 

2.15 

2. 57 



.29 


. 29 

(') 

.60 

Hartford-___ 

7. 65 

5. 95 

5.56 

4. 71 

.85 



.39 


.38 

.01 

1. 70 

New Britain__ . _ 

5.92 

4. 69 

4.16 

4.16 




.53 


.53 

(«) 

1. 23 

New Haven. 

5. 91 

4.93 

4. 30 

1.17 

3.13 



. 63 


.61 

.02 

.98 

Maine: Portland.. ... . 

3. 33 

3. 04 

2. 79 

1.38 

1. 41 



. 25 


. 16 

.09 

.29 

Massachusetts: 













Boston ._ __ . 

10. 61 

9.71 

8.49 

8. 49 




1. 22 

.09 

1.07 

.06 

.90 

Brockton___ 

5.89 

5.12 

4. 20 

4.16 

.04 



.92 

. 49 

.37 

. 06 

.77 

Cambridge. _ 

6.63 

5. 83 

4. 68 

4. 68 




1. 15 

. 12 

.94 

.09 

. 80 

Fall River_ 

6.16 

5.64 

5.11 

5. 11 




. 53 

. 20 

. 27 

.06 

.52 

Lawrence_ _ 

3.81 

3. 55 

2. 86 

2. 86 




. 69 

. 19 

. 48 

. 02 

. 26 

Lowell_ 

6.95 

6. 34 

5. 20 

4.11 

1.09 



1.14 

. 16 

. 92 

. 06 

.61 

Lynn __ 

6. 39 

5. 73 

4. 73 

4. 73 




1. 00 

. 40 

. 57 

.03 

.66 

Malden___ 

4. 96 

4.88 

4. 69 

4. 26 

.43 



. 19 

. 04 

. 12 

.03 

.08 

New Bedford.. _ 

7.19 

6.92 

6. 25 

6. 25 




. 67 

. 17 

. 47 

.03 

. 27 

Newton_ _ . 

2.62 

2. 06 

1. 51 

1. 04 

.47 



. 55 

. 13 

. 40 

.02 

.66 

Springfield__ 

7.01 

6. 30 

5.93 

5. 93 




. 37 

. 10 

. 25 

. 02 

.71 

Worcester_ ... 

7.27 

6. 69 

6.19 

6.19 




.50 

. 03 

. 43 

.04 

,68 

Rhode Island: Providence_ 

3. 74 

1.62 

1. 26 

1.01 

.25 



.36 


.36 

2.12 

Middle Atlantic 













New Jersey: 













Jersey City_ 

2.59 

2. 27 

1.52 

1.50 

.02 



.75 


. 74 

. 01 

.32 

Newark_ 

5.03 

4. 37 

3. 73 

3. 39 

.34 



.64 


.62 

.02 

.66 

Trenton _ 

5. 61 

3. 74 

2. 71 

2. 30 

.41 



1. 03 


.99 

.04 

1.8 

New York: 











Albany_ 

3. 30 

2. 41 

1.02 

.91 

. 11 



1. 39 

.94 

. 41 

. 04 

.89 

Buffalo_ 

6. 74 

6.07 

5. 29 

4. 69 

.60 



. 78 

29 

47 

02 

67 

New Rochelle_ 

1.89 

1.78 

1.35 

.68 

. 67 



. 43 

. 20 

. 22 

.01 

11 

New York. ... . 

6. 50 

4.13 

1.72 

.56 

1.16 



2. 41 

1. 04 

1. 34 

- 03 

2 37 

Niagara Falls_ 

6.81 

6. 22 

5. 20 

4. 30 

.90 



1. 02 

. 34 

. 67 

. 01 

.59 

Rochester_ 

12.29 

11.39 

10. 24 

8. 32 

1.92 



1. 15 

73 

38 

04 

90 

Syracuse..._ 

7.90 

7. 41 

6. 43 

3. 84 

2. 59 



. 98 

69 

. 27 

. 02 

49 

Utica_... 

4. 47 

2.99 

1.72 

1. 30 

. 42 



1 27 

58 

65 

04 

1 48 

Yonkers. 

4.68 

3. 20 

2.10 

2.08 

.02 



1.10 

.35 

.73 

.02 

i!48 

Pennsylvania: 









Allentown.. 

.47 

.31 

.06 

.06 




. 25 


. 25 


16 

Altoona_... 

1.25 

.91 

.58 

.58 




.33 


. 33 


. 34 

Bethlehem_ .. 

3. 33 

3. 01 

2. 73 

1.69 

1.04 



. 28 


J28 


, 32 

Chester._ 

.74 

.49 

.31 

.31 

(») 



. 18 


. 18 


! 25 

Erie. _ 

2.19 

1.71 

1. 37 

1.37 



. 34 


34 


48 

Johnstown_ 

1.54 

1.33 

.99 

.99 




. 34 


. 34 


21 

Philadelphia_ 

4.13 

1.76 

1.44 

1.44 




. 32 


.32 


2 37 

Pittsburgh_ .. . 

2. 79 

.88 

.57 

.57 


_1_ 

.31 


. 31 


1. 91 

Reading__ 

1. 76 

1. 30 

.98 

.68 

.30 



.32 


.32 


46 

Scranton. _ 

1.70 

1.24 

.81 

.81 




. 43 


. 43 


. 46 

Wilkes-Barre. __ 

1.62 

1.54 

1.15 

1.15 




.39 


. 39 


.08 

North Central 












niinois: 













Chicago.. 

3.54 

1.26 

.85 

.85 




.41 


29 

12 

2 ^ 

Springfield_ . 

1.49 

.96 

.31 

31 




65 


.14 

.51 

!53 

Indiana: 










Evansville__ 

2.71 

2. 22 

2.09 

2.09 




. 13 


. 13 


49 

Fort Wayne_ 

2. 87 

1.34 

1. 25 

1. 25 




.09 


09 


53 

Indianapolis_ 

2.58 

2.08 

2. 04 

2.04 




.04 


. 04 


50 

South Bend_ 

3.88 

3. 63 

3. 47 

3. 47 




. 16 


. Ifi 


' 25 

Terre Haute__ 

1. 41 

1. 10 

.96 

.96 




. 14 


.14 


.31 

Iowa: 











Des Moines_ 

2.03 

1.34 

.79 

.79 

(') 



. 55 


36 

]9 


Sioux City.... 

1. 50 

1.24 

.86 

. 60 

.26 



. 38 


.28 

.10 

.26 

Kansas: 










Kansas City_ 

.61 

.36 

.36 

.36 




(«) 


(«) 


^ 25 

Topeka_ 

1.61 

1.57 

1.41 

.88 

.53 



. 16 


16 


04 

Wichita_ .. 

1.01 

.74 

.65 

64 

.01 



. 09 


.09 


.27 

Michigan: 











Detroit__ 

7.17 

6. 92 

6.17 

5. 71 

.46 



. 75 


75 



Flint_ 

3.14 

2. 95 

2.30 

2. 30 




. 65 


65 



Grand Rapids__ 

3. 84 

3. 69 

3.16 

.99 

2.17 



.53 


53 



Pontiac....... 

3.10 

3. 08 

2. 44 

2.44 




.64 


64 



Saginaw__ . 

4. 89 

4. 72 

3.90 

3. 90 




.82 


.82 


.17 

Minnesota: 











Duluth_ 

3.10 

2.89 

1.52 

1. 41 

. 11 



1 37 

29 

1 04 



Minneapolis_ 

2. 56 

1.63 

1.09 

.93 

. 16 



. 54 

05 

46 



St. Paul_ 

1.98 

1.41 

.74 

.74 




.67 

.03 

.60 

.04 

.57 

Missouri: 








Kansas City_ 

1. 67 

. 24 






. 24 


05 



St. Louis. _ 

1.43 

.64 

.42 

.35 

.07 



.22 


!o6 

.16 

.79 


See footnotes at end of table. 


136 





































































































































































































































Table C-2i^Amount per inhabitant ^ of public and private assistance and earnings under specified Federal work 

programs, by urban area, 195i—Continued 


Geographic division, State, 
and urban area > 


North Central— Con. 


Nebraska: Omaha. 
Ohio: 

Akron.. 

Canton.. 

Cincinnati_ 

Cleveland_ 

Columbus_ 

Dayton_ 

Springfield_ 

Toledo_ 

Youngstown... 

Wisconsin; 

Kenosha_ 

Madison_ 

Milwaukee_ 

Racine_ 


South Atlantic and South 
Central 

Alabama: 

Birmingham_ 

Mobile___ 

Delaware: Wilmington_ 

District of Columbia: Wash¬ 
ington_ 

Florida: 

Jacksonville_ 

Miami_ 

Georgia: Atlanta_ 

Kentucky: Louisville_ 

Louisiana: 

New Orleans_ 

Shreveport___ 

Maryland: Baltimore. 

North Carolina: 

Asheville..__ 

Charlotte_ 

Greensboro_ 

W inston-Salem_ 

Oklahoma: Tulsa_ 

South Carolina: Charleston... 
Tennessee: 

Knoxville_ 

Memphis_ 

Nashville_ 

Texas: 

Dallas_ 

El Paso_ 

Fort Worth_ 

Houston.... 

San Antonio__ 

Virginia: 

Norfolk_ 

Richmond___ 

Roanoke__ 

West Virginia; Huntington_ 

Mountain and Pacific 

California: 

Los Angeles... 

Oakland_ 

Sacramento. 

San Diego_ 

San Francisco_ 

Colorado: Denver_ 

Oregon: Portland_ 

Utah: Salt Lake City... 

Washington: 

Seattle.. 

Tacoma_ 


Total 
public 
and 
private 
funds * 


$1.27 

1.94 
3. 91 
3. 30 
3.63 
2.07 
2.43 
1.05 
4.31 
2.06 

6.97 
1.81 
6.02 
7.68 


.98 
.10 
3.04 

1.05 

.84 

.91 

.74 

1.52 

1.09 
.46 
1.56 

.47 

.75 

.84 

.85 

.58 

.14 

.44 

.88 

.34 

.62 

.68 

.65 

.42 

.18 

.41 
1.10 
.49 
.51 


3.66 
3.87 
2.49 
2. 28 
5. 24 
1.58 
4.65 
2.24 

1.48 
1. 31 


Total 


$0.71 

1.53 
2. 24 
2.09 
2.17 
1.73 
1.92 
.61 
4.09 
.99 

6. 21 
1.61 
6.60 
7.50 


.53 

.02 

.50 

.28 

.60 

.66 

.39 

1.11 

.18 

.15 

.45 

.29 

.28 

.83 

.31 

.29 

.09 

.08 

.13 

.16 

.45 

.55 

.62 

.11 

.03 

.17 

.50 

.23 

.20 


3. 33 
3.75 
2.23 
2.17 

4. 44 
.87 

4.35 
1.03 

1.11 

1.05 


Public funds 


General relief ♦ 


Total 


$0.33 

1.31 

1.53 
1.56 
1.66 
1.14 
1.67 

.45 
3.69 
.65 

4.77 
.79 
4. 53 

6.53 


.53 

.02 

.01 

.01 

.26 

.29 

.39 

>'>.83 

.16 

.09 

.32 

.27 

.25 

.80 

.28 

.26 

.09 


.16 

.36 

.56 

.62 

.06 

.03 

.17 

.44 

.23 

.15 


2.79 
1.99 
.60 
1. 36 
3.12 
.38 
4.06 
.45 

.79 

.56 


Direct 

relief 


$0.33 

1. 31 
1. 53 
.87 
1. 44 
1.10 
.71 
.45 
3.17 
.66 

4.77 
.79 
3.47 
6. 64 


.02 


.01 

.26 
.29 
.39 
w. 41 


.09 

.32 

.27 

.25 

.44 

.28 

.26 

.09 


.16 

.20 

.19 

.62 

.06 

.03 

.15 

.44 

.23 

.15 


1.65 
1.99 
.60 
1.15 
(') 

.38 

.67 

.45 

.45 

.55 


Work 

relief 


$ 0.68 

.22 

.04 

.86 


.62 


1.06 

.99 


Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 


Civil 
Works 
Pro¬ 
gram 5 


Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA 8 


.53 

'.'oi 


ID. 42 
.16 


.36 


.02 


1.24 

(») 


.21 

3.12 


3.39 


.34 


Special types of public assistance 


Total 


$0.38 

.22 

.71 

.54 

.51 

.59 

.35 

.16 

.40 

.34 

1.44 

.82 

1.07 

.97 


Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 


.28 

.02 

.06 

.13 

.02 

.03 

.03 

.03 

.03 


.08 

.13 


.09 

'os' 


.54 
1.76 
1.63 
.81 
1.32 
.49 
.29 
.58 

.32 

.50 


$0. 32 


.18 


.15 


.02 


.04 


.27 

.67 

.96 

.55 

.48 


.32 


Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

children 


$0.36 

.17 

.36 

.44 

.45 

.41 

.24 

.13 

.32 

.24 

1.00 

.74 

.81 

.80 


Aid to 
the blind 


Private 
funds t 


.18 


.04 

.04 

.02 

.03 

.03 

.03 

.03 


.08 

.13 


.17 

.91 

.50 

.20 

.74 

.36 

.29 

.26 

.32 

.50 


$0.03 

.05 
.35 
. 10 
.06 
. 18 
.11 
.03 
.08 
;10 

.12 

.08 

.08 

.17 


ID. 08 

.02 

.02 

.05 


.10 

.18 

.17 

.06 

.10 

.13 


$0.56 

.41 
1.67 
1.21 
1.46 
.34 
.51 
.44 
.22 
1.07 

.76 

.20 

.42 

.18 


.45 

.08 

2.64 

.77 

.24 
.26 
.36 
ID. 41 

.91 
.31 
1.11 

.18 

.47 

.01 

.54 

.29 

.05 

.36 

.75 

.18 

.17 

.13 

.03 

.31 

.15 

.24 

.60 

.26 

.31 


.33 

.12 

.26 

.11 

.80 

.71 

.30 

1.21 

.37 

.26 


1 Based on total population of areas estimated from U. S. censuses of 1930 
and 1940. 

I See app. A for the territory and total population included in each urban 
area. Amounts per inhabitant based on figures which relate to territory 
other than that shown in app. A are footnoted. 

» Excludes cost of administration; of materials, equipment, and other items 
incident to operation of work programs; and of transient care. 


I Includes statutory aid to veterans administered on basis of need. 

D Not initiated until 1933. 

* Not initiated until 1935. 

I Includes direct and work relief and aid to veterans. 

* Based on number of areas reporting expenditures for specified type of aid. 
D Less than 1 cent. 

ID Relates to city. 


137 













































































































































































































Table C—25 .—Amount per inhabitant * of public and private assistance and earnings under specified Federal work 

programs, by urban area, 1932 


Public funds 


Geofrraphie division, State, 
and ui'ban area * 

Total 

public 

and 

private 
funds s 

Total 

General relief < 

Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 

Special types of public assistance 

Private 
fimds' 

Total 

Direct 

relief 

Work 

relief 

Civil 
Works 
Pro¬ 
gram s 

Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA « 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

children 

Aid to 
the blind 

Median *_ _ 

$ 4 . 81 

$ 4 . 04 

$ 3 . 56 

$ 2.47 

$ 0 . 93 



$ 0.50 

$ 0.61 

$ 0 . 36 

$ 0.05 

$ 0.45 

New England 













Connecticut: 













■Rrid^ppnrt 

9.69 

8 . 82 

8.52 

4 . 76 

3 . 76 



.30 


.29 

.01 

.87 

Hartford 

11 . 88 

7 . 85 

7.37 

6 . 79 

.68 



.48 


.47 

.01 

4.03 

New Rritain 

13 . 71 

12.68 

12.11 

12.11 




.57 


. 57 

C ) 

1.03 

New Haven 

8 . 71 

7.06 

6 . 37 

2 . 34 

4.03 



.69 


.67 

.02 

1.65 

Maine: Portland 

4.68 

4.24 

3.96 

3.96 




.28 


.18 

.10 

.44 

Massachusetts: 













■Roston 

19.99 

16.50 

13.93 

13 . 93 




2 . 57 

1 . 30 

1 . 20 

.07 

3.49 

■Rroekton 

8.87 

8.09 

6.39 

6 . 39 




1 . 70 

1 . 21 

.43 

.06 

.78 

Cambridge 

11.14 

9 . 55 

7 . 75 

7.75 




1.80 

.89 

.81 

.10 

1 . 59 

Pall Tllver 

11.00 

10.30 

8.61 

8.61 




1.69 

1.12 

. 50 

.07 

.70 

T.awrenoe 

7.29 

6.99 

5 . 71 

5.71 




1 . 28 

.78 

.48 

.02 

.30 

T.nwell 

9.56 

8.87 

6 . 86 

6.85 




2.02 

.94 

1.03 

.05 

,69 

T,ynn 

10 . 69 

10.16 

8.16 

8.16 




2.00 

1.45 

.52 

.03 

. 63 

Malden 

8 . 57 

8.53 

7.82 

7.82 




. 71 

.59 

.09 

.03 

.04 

New Bedford_ -- _ 

10.84 

10 . 57 

8.84 

8.84 




1 . 73 

1.08 

.61 

.04 

. 27 

Newton __ __ 

4 . 62 

3.50 

2.51 

2 . 61 




.99 

.54 

.42 

.03 

1.12 

Rprinpfie.ld 

13.04 

12.13 

11.29 

11.29 




.84 

.62 

.20 

.02 

.91 

Worcester_ . __ 

12.46 

11.73 

10.53 

10.53 




1.20 

.71 

.44 

.05 

.73 

Rhode Island: Providence_ 

7.80 

7.23 

6.85 

3.22 

3.63 



.38 


.38 


,67 

MroDLE Atlantic 













New Jersey: 













Jersey City 

6.35 

6.69 

4.84 

3.98 

.86 



.85 


.83 

.02 

.66 

Newarlr 

8.93 

8.37 

7.44 

4.79 

2.65 



.93 

.13 

. 77 

.03 

. 66 

Trenton__ 

11 . 51 

7.70 

6.31 

4.97 

1.34 



1.39 

.26 

1.08 

.05 

3.81 

New York: 












Albany . . 

5.96 

5.34 

4.27 

1.60 

2 . 67 



1.07 

.68 

.34 

.05 

.62 

Buffalo_ - _ 

14.15 

13.16 

12.10 

9.85 

2 . 25 



1.06 

. 54 

. 49 

.03 

.99 

New Rochelle ___ _ 

7 . 96 

7.87 

7.17 

3.25 

3.92 



.70 

.43 

. 26 

.01 

. no 

New York ____ 

11 . .34 

8.24 

6.44 

2.58 

2.86 



2 . 80 

1 . 28 

1 . 49 

.03 

3 in 

Niapara Palls 

16 . 94 

16.68 

15.60 

9 . 75 

6.85 



1.08 

. 37 

. 70 

.01 

.-26 

Rochester_ 

14.80 

14 . 38 

12.47 

10.49 

1.98 



1.91 

1.46 

. 41 

.04 

.42 

.Syraense 

14.05 

13.74 

12.36 

7 . 26 

5.10 



1 . 38 

1.05 

.31 

.02 


Utica_ 

11.34 

10 . 57 

8 . 39 

4.53 

3.86 



2.18 

1 . 24 

.89 

.05 

- 77 

Yonkers_ 

14.29 

13.64 

12.26 

7.16 

5.10 



1.38 

.61 

.75 

.02 

.65 

Pennsvlvania: 












Allentown_ 

.55 

.38 

.07 

.07 




.31 


.31 


- 17 

Altoona__ 

3.77 

2.84 

2.47 

2.47 




.37 


.37 


. Q.^ 

Bethlehem_ 

2.77 

2.49 

2.12 

2.12 




.37 


. 37 


_28 

Chester_ 

2.72 

2.49 

2.21 

2 . 21 




.28 


.28 



Erie_ - - 

4.93 

4 . 51 

4.09 

4.09 




.42 


. 42 


- 42 

Johnstown_ 

1.78 

1.71 

1.20 

1.20 




.51 


. 51 


.07 

Philadelphia_ 

5.36 

2.82 

2 . 46 

2.46 




.36 


.36 


2 54 

Pittsburgh,,__ 

6.24 

4.18 

3.82 

3 . 82 




.36 


.36 


2 nfi 

Beading_ __ 

6.01 

5.27 

4.89 

4.13 




.38 


.38 


' 74 

Scranton... _ 

2.95 

2.46 

1.99 

1.99 




.47 


.47 


4fl 

Wilkes-Barre_ 

4.03 

3.73 

3.16 

2.77 

.39 



.67 


.57 


.30 

Noeth Central 












Illinois: 













Chicago_ 

10.12 

9.09 

8.68 

8.12 

.56 



.41 


.29 



Springfield_ 

3.19 

2.66 

1.98 

1.98 




.68 


.18 

.50 

'.63 

Indiana: 










Evansville_ 

5.36 

4.64 

4.52 

4.52 




. 12 


. 12 


7? 

Fort Wayne_ 

5.72 

4.17 

4.08 

4.08 




.09 


.09 


] 55 

Indianapolis_ .. 

4.17 

3.61 

3 . 58 

3 . 58 




.03 


.03 


5fi 

South Bend_ 

6.78 

6 . 59 

6.39 

6 . 39 




.20 


. 20 


19 

Terre Haute_ 

2 . 54 

2.16 

2.02 

2.02 




.14 


. 14 


.38 

Iowa: 












Des Moines_ 

4.07 

3.19 

2.63 

2.63 




.66 



20 

.-88 

Sioux City_ 

3.40 

3.11 

2.65 

2.28 

.37 



.46 


.35 

.11 

.29 

Kansas: 










Kansas City_ 

1.36 

.60 

.60 

.29 

.31 



(*) 


(S) 


76 

Topeka_ 

3.00 

2.95 

2.74 

1.21 

1 . 53 



.21 


. 9A 


06 

Wichita_ 

2.15 

1.72 

1.59 

1.05 

.54 



. 13 


.13 


.43 

Michigan: 











Detroit_ _ 

6.06 

6.55 

4.80 

3 . 75 ' 

1.05 



.75 


.75 


.-61 

Flint_ 

5 . 56 

5.15 

4 . 43 

4.43 




.72 


. 72 


.-41 

Grand Rapids_ 

6.14 

6.04 

6.57 

1.61 

3.96 



.47 


.47 



Pontiac_ _ 

4 . 81 

4 . 79 

4.28 

4.28 




.51 


51 


^ 02 

Saginaw_ 

4 . 81 

4.61 

3 . 72 

3.72 




.89 


.89 


.20 

Minnesota: 











Dnlnth _ 

6.77 

6 . 65 

5.28 

4 . 72 

.56 



1 . 27 


.-85 

04 


Minneapolis_ 

5 . 66 

4.56 

3.68 

3.53 

. 15 



. 88 


' 52 

.-03 

1 in 

St. Paul_ 

5.08 

3.39 

2.46 

2.46 




.93 

.28 

.61 

.04 

1.69 

Missouri: 








Kansas City_ 

2.60 

.93 

>«.64 

i ».64 




.29 


08 

.-21 

10 1 ft *? 

St. Louis_ 

3.21 

1.34 

1.10 

1.10 




.24 


ioe 

iisl 

1.87 


See footnotes at end of table. 


V 


138 

































































































































































































































Table 0-25. Amount per inhabitant » of public and private assistance and earnings under specified Federal work 

Programs, by urban area, 2932—Continued 


Public funds 


Geographic division. State, 
and urban area ^ 

Total 
public 
and 
private 
funds ’ 

Total 

General relief < 

Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 

Special types of public assistance 

Private 
funds J 


Total 

Direct 

relief 

Work 

relief 

Civil 
Works 
Pro¬ 
gram « 

Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA 0 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

children 

Aid to 
the blind 

North Central— Con. 













Nebraska: Omaha_ 

$1.82 

$0.90 

$0.56 

$0. 56 




$0.34 

.21 

.81 

.55 

.53 

.61 

.38 

.20 

.50 

.31 

1. 79 
.96 
1. 28 
1.14 


$0.30 

.17 

.47 

.45 

.47 

.43 

.27 

.16 

.39 

.21 

1.25 

.87 

.95 

.95 



Ohio: 

Akron.. 

Canton__ 

3.04 
6. 51 

2. 65 

3. 61 

2. 44 
2. 80 

2. 44 
2.80 





$0.04 

.04 

.34 

.10 

.06 

$0.92 

.39 

1.90 

.71 

Cincmnati. 

Cleveland. 

6. 77 
5.62 

6.06 
4. 37 

5. 51 
3.84 

3. 21 
3. 84 

$2. 30 




Columbus_... 

5. 07 

4. 63 

4.02 

1.40 

2. 62 




1. 26 

Dayton... 

4.17 

3. 86 

3. 48 

2.91 

.57 




• 18 

. 44 

Springfield...__ 

1. 68 

1.11 

.91 

.91 




• 11 
• 04 

.31 

Toledo__ 

4. 87 

4. 76 

4.26 

4. 26 





.57 

Youngstown.. 

4. 32 

4.02 

3. 71 

3. 47 

.24 




• 11 
.10 

• 11 

Wisconsin: 

Kenosha_ 

14.17 

12. 72 

10.93 

10.93 



$0. 39 

. 30 

1.45 

Madison_ .. 

4.23 

4.06 

3.10 

3.10 




• 15 
.09 

Milwaukee _ 

12.28 

11.88 

10.60 

9.05 

1.55 

.22 



.25 

. 17 
.40 

Racine.... 

11.78 

9. 41 

8.27 

8.05 



.08 

.19 

South Atlantic and South 
Central 





2.37 

Alabama: 

Birmingham_ 

2.08 

1. 45 

1.45 

1.05 

.40 







.63 

Mobile__ 

.44 

.03 

.03 

.03 








Delaware: Wilmington . .. 

8.27 

3.22 

2.35 

1.02 

1.33 



.87 

.26 

.30 

.32 

.50 

.37 

.26 

.30 

.32 


6.05 

L77 

.17 

.25 

.38 

10.68 

.63 

.31 

1.26 

.44 

.35 

.01 

.31 

.46 

.12 

.13 

.43 

.21 

.47 

.07 

.10 

.37 

.29 

.38 

.77 

.34 

.35 

District of Columbia: Wash¬ 
ington. 

2. 62 

.85 

.59 

.21 

.38 




Florida: 

Jacksonville_ 

1.75 

1. 58 

1.28 

.61 

.67 





Miami_ ... 

1. 77 

1. 52 

1.20 

.36 

.84 





Georgia: Atlanta... 

1.63 

1. 25 

1.25 

1.10 

.15 





Kentucky: Louisville.._ 

2. 37 

1.69 

101.42 

JO. 43 

10.99 



.27 

.02 

.06 

.20 

.02 

.04 

.04 

.02 

.17 

i".08 

.02 

.03 

.06 

Louisiana: 

New Orleans___ 

2.06 

1.43 

1.41 

.14 

1. 27 



Shreveport_ 

.75 

.44 

.38 

.03 

.35 




.03 

.05 

.02 

.04 

.04 

.04 

.05 

Maryland: Baltimore.... 

5.48 

4. 22 

4.02 

1.88 

2.14 



.09 

North Cai-olina: 

Asheville_ 

1.16 

.72 

.70 

.21 

.49 



Charlotte__ 

1.98 

1.63 

1.59 

1.20 

.39 





Greensboro_ 

1. 37 

1.36 

1.32 

1.32 





Winston-Salem_ 

.92 

.61 

.57 

.53 

.04 



.04 



Oklahoma: Tulsa.. 

1. 73 

1. 27 

1. 22 

1.22 



.05 



South Carolina: Charleston_ 

.25 

.13 

.13 

.13 






Tennessee: 

Knoxville.. 

.57 

.44 

.30 

.01 

.29 



. 14 


.14 

.12 


Memphis__ 

.66 

.23 

.11 

.11 



.12 



NashvUle_ 

.57 

.36 

.36 

.36 





Texas: 

Dallas... 

1.40 

.93 

.85 

.15 

. 70 



.08 


.03 


El Paso_ 

1. 98 

1. 91 

1.91 

.74 

1.17 





Fort Worth__ 

.93 

.83 

.83 

.75 

.08 







Houston_ 

.71 

.34 

.29 

.29 



.05 


.05 


San Antonio_ 

.65 

.36 

.36 

.07 

.29 





Virginia: 

Norfolk.... 

.50 

.12 

.12 

.12 



(•) 

.05 


(«) 

.05 


Richmond... 

1. 89 

1.12 

1.07 

.54 

.53 





Roanoke___ 

.82 

.48 

.48 

.48 





West Virginia: Huntington... 

.53 

.18 

.13 

.13 




.05 


.05 


Mountain and Pacific 






California: 

Los Angeles_ 

4.01 

3. 61 

2.78 

2.10 

.68 



.83 

.46 

.21 

.16 

.23 

.40 

.22 

.29 

.13 

.78 

1.92 

Oakland_ 

6. 44 

6.22 

4.21 

2.97 

1.24 



2.01 

.86 

.92 

Sacramento__ 

2. 71 

2. 42 

.63 

.63 



1.79 

1.05 

.54 

.20 

San Diego_ 

4.04 

3.91 

2.91 

1.28 

1.63 



1.00 

.69 

.24 

.07 

San Francisco_ 

7. 52 

6. 74 

5.34 

.25 

5.09 



1.40 

.53 

.76 

. 11 

Colorado: Denver_ 

3. 70 

1. 78 

1.29 

1.29 



.49 

.36 

.13 

Oregon: Portland_ 

9. 04 

8. 70 

8. 43 

1. 93 

6. 50 



.27 


.27 

.34 

Utah: Salt Lake City.. 

5.19 

4.06 

3. 54 

2. 43 

1.11 



.52 

.27 

.25 


1.13 

Washington: 

Seattle _ 

5. 45 

5.18 

4.87 

4. 83 

.04 



.31 

.31 


.27 

Tacoma....... 

4. 36 

4.11 

3. 57 

3. 57 



.54 


.54 


.25 


1 Based on total population of areas estimated from U. S. censuses of 1930 
and 1940. 

* See app. A for the territory and total population included in each urban 
area. Amounts per inhabitant based on figures which relate to territory 
other than that shown in app. A are footnoted. 

s Excludes cost of administration; of materials, equipment, and other 
items incident to operation of work programs; and of transient care. 


‘ Includes statutory aid to veterans administered on basis of need. 

‘ Not initiated imtil 1933. 

» Not initiated imtil 1935. 

1 1ncludes direct and work relief and aid to veterans. 

« Based on number of areas reporting expenditures for specified type of aid. 
» Less than 1 cent. 
lORelates to city. 


10 


452436“—42 


139 











































































































































































































Table C—26 .—Amount per inhabitant 


of public and private assistance and earnings under specified Federal work 
programs, by urban area, 1933 


Geographic division, State, 
and urban area ’ 


Total 

public 

and 


Public funds 


General relief * 


nvate 
xnds 3 

Total 

Total 

Direct 

relief 

$9.52 

$9.13 

$6.86 

$5.60 

10.03 

9.54 

8.08 

7.36 

11.39 

8.26 

7.08 

6.94 

11.70 

9.70 

7.32 

7.32 

9.76 

§.32 

6.61 

5.60 

9.42 

9.00 

6.69 

6.69 

21.69 

19.62 

15.86 

15.86 

9.43 

8.83 

6.73 

6.73 

11.91 

10.82 

7.87 

7.87 

9.64 

9.61 

6.59 

6.59 

6.35 

6.17 

4.12 

4.12 

11.49 

10.93 

7.09 

7.09 

14.23 

13.91 

10.11 

10.11 

9.44 

9.43 

8.07 

8.07 

10. 37 

10.17 

7.23 

7.23 

7.65 

7.14 

5.04 

5.04 

18. 59 

18.20 

15. 75 

15.75 

14. 49 

14.02 

11.16 

11.16 

10.43 

9.69 

7.85 

4.08 

8.14 

8.05 

5.87 

5.87 

11.21 

10.98 

8.85 

8.13 

10.78 

10.22 

7.90 

7.90 

9.75 

9.37 

7.05 

3.19 

19. 25 

18.61 

16. 45 

10.76 

16.08 

16.03 

13.88 

9.38 

16. 36 

14.38 

10.95 

5.92 

16. 21 

15.97 

13. 57 

7.05 

17.90 

17.66 

13.89 

7.92 

21.04 

20.85 

18.01 

6.69 

15.69 

14.99 

11.80 

4.78 

20.20 

19.84 

17.67 

6.90 

6.81 

6. 71 

5.96 

5.85 

6.30 

6.11 

6.05 

4.83 

8.37 

8.10 

7.22 

7.07 

5.41 

5.32 

4.74 

4.58 

6.24 

6.24 

5.56 

5.56 

7.28 

7.25 

5. 72 

5. 57 

9.12 

8.53 

8.10 

8.09 

11.60 

11.29 

10.61 

10.52 

10. 69 

10.54 

9.46 

7.87 

7. 21 

6.91 

6.02 

5.60 

9.00 

8.95 

8.00 

6. 73 

15.65 

15.06 

13.51 

11.46 

5.65 

5.33 

2.74 

2.37 

10.02 

10.00 

7.70 

6.84 

9.71 

9.03 

6.63 

5.27 

6.61 

6.27 

4.38 

4.37 

9.74 

9.68 

7.78 

7.66 

6. 57 

6.34 

3. 57 

2.43 

12.01 

11.88 

8.35 

7.49 

8.68 

8.54 

5.43 

3.30 

5.48 

5.14 

2.99 

.95 

7.34 

7.32 

4.86 

1.82 

8.16 

7.98 

5.59 

1.87 

10.89 

10. 77 

8.56 

6.90 

8.46 

8.42 

6.35 

6.14 

9.70 

9.66 

7.67 

7.15 

9.85 

9.84 

8.22 

7.90 

5.50 

5.39 

3.63 

3.49 

10.70 

10.66 

7.21 

7.21 

10.38 

9.46 

6.65 

6.65 

10.59 

9.82 

7.09 

6.90 

5.56 

4.18 

IS 3.07 

” 3.05 

7.65 

7.22 

5.86 

5.86 



Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 

Special types of public assistance 

Private 
funds ’ 


Civil 

Projects 



Aid to 



Work 

Works 

operated 



depend- 

Aid to 


relief 

Pro- 

by the 



ent 

the blind 



gram « 

WPA 6 



children 



$1.34 

$1.37 


$0.48 

$0.65 

.$0.33 

$0.06 

$0.22 

.72 

1.13 


.33 


.32 

.01 

.49 

.14 

.59 


.59 


.57 

.02 

3.13 


1. 78 


.60 


.60 

(») 

2.00 

1.01 

.97 


.74 


.72 

.02 

1.44 


2.03 


.28 


.20 

.08 

.42 


.73 


3.03 

1.55 

1.41 

.07 

2.07 


.58 


1.52 

.92 

.54 

.06 

.60 


1.11 


1.84 

1.05 

.69 

.10 

1.09 


1.15 


1.87 

1. 23 

.56 

.08 

.03 


.66 


1.39 

.88 

.48 

.03 

.18 


1.51 


2. 33 

1 20 

1.07 

.06 

.66 


1.30 


2.50 

1.90 

.57 

.03 

.32 


.60 


.76 

. 64 

.10 

.02 

.01 


.87 


2.07 

1 41 

.62 

.04 

.20 


1.03 


1.07 

.66 

.38 

.03 

.61 


1.28 


1.17 

.91 

.24 

J)2 

.39 


1.41 


1.45 

.92 

.48 

.05 

.47 

3.77 

1.43 


.41 

.41 

.74 


10 1.36 


.82 


.79 

.03 

.09 

.72 

10.48 


1.65 

.37 

1.25 

.03 

.23 


10.87 


1.45 

.56 

.83 

.06 

.56 

3 

101.44 


.88 

.53 

.31 

.04 

.38 

5.69 

1.03 


1.13 

.63 

.47 

.03 

.64 

4. .50 

11 1.34 


.81 

.55 

.25 

.01 

.05 

.5.03 

1.00 


2.43 

1.05 

1.35 

.03 

1.98 

6.52 

1.32 


1.08 

.36 

.71 

.01 

.24 

5.97 

101.58 


2.19 

1.69 

.46 

.04 

.24 

11.32 

10 1.48 


1.36 

1.04 

.29 

.03 

.19 

7.02 

.97 


2.22 

1.23 

.95 

.04 

.70 

in 77 

.72 


1.45 

.68 

.75 

.02 

36 

n 

.39 


.36 


.36 

.10 

’ 9.9. 

.69 


.37 


.37 


.19 

If; 

.52 


.36 


.36 


, 97 

.16 

.30 


.28 


.28 


.09 

.27 


.41 


.41 


(«) 

IS 

.51 


1.02 


1.02 


.03 

.01 

.10 


.33 


.33 


J59 

09 

.24 


.44 


.44 


.31 

1 fiO 

.62 


.46 


.46 


. 1.1 

42 

.63 


.26 


.26 


30 

I 27 

.30 


.65 


.65 


,05 

2 05 

1.20 


.35 


.23 

.12 

59 

1 37 

1.98 


.61 


.08 

.53 

39 

.86 

2.19 


.11 


.11 

09 

1.36 

2.31 


.09 


.09 


63 

.01 

1.80 


.03 


.03 


! 34 

.12 

1.71 


. 19 


.19 


.06 

1.14 

2.67 


.10 


.10 


23 

.86 

3.05 


.48 


.32 

.16 

13 

2.13 

2.57 


.54 


.42 

.12 

, 14 

2.04 

2.15 


(0) 



34 

3.04 

2.29 


.17 


.17 


02 

3.72 

2.29 


.10 


.10 


13 

1.66 

1.60 


.61 


.61 


1? 

.21 

1.20 


.87 


.87 


04 

.52 

1.59 


.40 


.40 


04 

.32 

1.48 


.14 


.14 


m 

.14 

1.02 


.74 


.74 


, 11 


1.79 


1.56 

.34 

1 

04 


(•) 

101.78 


1.03 

.45 

'.55 

.03 

.92 

.19 

1.74 


.99 

.36 

.59 

.04 

.77 

”. 02 

10.79 


.32 


. n« 

J24 

IS 2 3g 

(•) 

101.12 


.24 


.05 

!io 

.43 


Median 


New England 

Connecticut: 

Bridgeport.. 

Hartford___ 

New Britain... 

New Haven_ 

Maine: Portland.... 

Massachusetts: 

Boston..... 

Brockton... 

Cambridge.. 

Fall River__ 

Lawrence.__ 

Lowell.___ 

Lynn... 

Malden_ 

New Bedford_ 

Newton_ 

Springfield.. 

Worcester.. 

Rhode Island: Providence. 

Middle Atlantic 

New Jersey: 

Jersey City..... 

Newark..__ 

Trenton_ 

New York: 

Albany___ 

Buffalo_ 

New Rochelle... 

New York__ 

Niagara Falls_ 

Rochester... 

Syracuse_ 

Utica___ 

Yonkers__ 

Pennsylvania: 

Allentown_ 

Altoona.... 

Bethlehem_ 

Chester... 

Erie... 

Johnstown_ 

Philadelphia_ 

Pittsburgh... 

Reading.__ 

Scranton... 

Wilkes-Barre_ 


North Central 
Illinois: 

Chicago__ 

Springfield.. 

Indiana: 

Evansville__ 

Fort Wayne_ 

Indianapolis... 

South Bend_ 

Terre Haute_ 

Iowa: 

Des Moines..... 

Sioux City... 

Kansas: 

Kansas City.... 

Topeka_ 

Wichita.__ 

Michigan: 

Detroit_ 

Flint...... 

Grand Rapids.. 

Pontiac_ 

Saginaw__ 

Minnesota: 

Duluth.__ 

Minneapolis_ 

St. Paul_ 

Missouri: 

Kansas City_ 

St. Louis_ 


See footnotes at end of table. 


140 












































































































































































































































Table 0“26. ATnoimt per inhabitant ^ of public and private assistance and earnings under specified Federal work 

programs, by urban area, 1933 —Continued 


Geographic division. State, 
and urban area > 

Total 

public 

and 

private 
funds 3 


Total 

North Central—C on. 



Nebraska: Omaha_ 

$4.63 

$4.17 

Ohio: 



Akron.... 

9.07 

8.88 

Canton.. 

7.51 

7. 51 

Cincinnati_ 

11.31 

10.94 

Cleveland... 

11.83 

11. 27 

Columbus__ 

11.12 

10.86 

Dayton..... 

9.88 

9. 55 

Springfield__ 

6.99 

6 . 92 

Toledo--- 

11.74 

11.72 

Youngstown... 

11.33 

11.18 

Wisconsin: 



Kenosha_ 

21.12 

20.98 

Madison..... 

14. 26 

14.23 

MUwaukee-- 

14.64 

14.36 

Racine... 

16.05 

15.97 

South Atlantic and 



South Central 



Alabama; 



Birmingham.. 

5. 63 

5.52 

Mobile_ 

5.71 

5.71 

Delaware: Wilmington_ 

13.87 

12.05 

District of Columbia; Wash- 



ington___ 

6.81 

6.23 

Florida: 



Jacksonville___ 

9.43 

9.37 

Miami_ _ 

5.76 

5.62 

Georgia: Atlanta- 

7.19 

6 .97 

Kentucky: Louisville- 

4.06 

3.75 

Louisiana: 



New Orleans_ 

9.89 

9.65 

Shreveport- 

4.02 

3. 93 

Maryland: Baltimore.. 

11.24 

10. 77 

North Carolina: 



Asheville_ 

3. 56 

3.49 

Charlotte__ 

4.65 

4.60 

Greensboro_ 

5.58 

5.56 

W inston-Salem-- 

4.81 

4. 53 

Oklahoma: Tulsa- 

7.06 

6.94 

South Carolina: Charleston... 

5. 60 

5.52 

Tennessee: 



Knoxville..... 

2.53 

2.49 

Memphis... 

4.36 

3. 96 

Nashville_ 

2.05 

1.86 

Texas: 



Dallas-- 

6 . 32 

6.15 

El Paso... 

6.61 

6.50 

Fort Worth_ 

5.21 

5.17 

Houston_ 

4. 32 

4.28 

San Antonio_ 

5. 38 

5.29 

Virginia: 



Norfolk-- 

3.09 

2.87 

Richmond-- 

3.23 

2.51 

Roanoke- 

2 . 61 

2.32 

West Virginia: Huntington... 

12.62 

12.22 

Mountain and Pacific 



California: 



Los Angeles... 

11.15 

10.92 

Oakland__ 

9. 35 

9. 22 

Sacramento_ 

4.39 

4.28 

San Diego_ 

5.89 

5.82 

San Francisco_ 

11. 95 

11.59 

Colorado; Denver- 

9. 59 

9.32 

Oregon: Portland... 

12 . 17 

12.09 

Utah: Salt Lake City... 

11.69 

11.27 

Washington: 



Seattle_ 

11.49 

11. 34 

Tacoma...-- 

11.06 

11.04 


Public funds 


General relief < 

Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 

Special types of public assistance 

Private 
funds t 

Total 

Direct 

relief 

Work 

relief 

Civil 
Works 
Pro¬ 
gram * 

Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA » 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

children 

Aid to 
the blind 

$2.88 

$2.88 


$1.01 


$0.28 


$0.24 

$n 04 

$0 46 

6. 62 

5.63 

$0.99 

2.05 


.21 


.18 

.03 

. 19 

5. 44 

5.44 

(*) 

1.51 


.56 


.27 

.29 

(«) 

8.41 

4.54 

3.87 

1.98 


.55 


.45 

.10 

.37 

8.35 

7.96 

.39 

2.40 


.52 


.46 

.06 

.56 

8.08 

3.35 

4. 73 

2.24 


.54 


.37 

.17 

.26 

7.38 

5.88 

1.50 

1.79 


.38 


.28 

.10 

.33 

4.18 

4.11 

.07 

2.54 


.20 


.16 

.04 

.07 

7.74 

7.44 

.30 

3.53 


.45 


.36 

.09 

.02 

8. 26 

8.07 

.19 

2.62 


.30 


.20 

. 10 

.15 

15. 26 

15.02 

.24 

3.90 


1.82 

$0.48 

1.19 

.15 

.14 

7.95 

6. 78 

1.17 

6.49 


.79 


.70 

.09 

.03 

10.49 

7. 99 

2.50 

2.57 


1.30 

.30 

.91 

.09 

.28 

12.53 

12.13 

.40 

2.37 


1.07 


.93 

.14 

.08 

4.06 

2.03 

2.03 

1.46 






.11 

4.43 

1.09 

3.34 

1.28 






(') 

10.91 

8.49 

2.42 

.24 


.90 

.54 

.36 


1.82 

4.27 

1.17 

3.10 

1.69 


.27 


.27 


.68 

6.40 

1. 38 

5.02 

2.76 


.21 


.21 


.06 

4.02 

.49 

3. 53 

1.36 


.24 


.24 


.14 

5 16 

3. 21 

1.95 

1.81 






.22 

12 3.00 

12.68 

12 2. 32 

.47 


.28 

.02 

.18 

u .08 

U.31 

6.99 

.99 

6.00 

2.64 


.02 



.02 

.24 

2. 29 

.07 

2. 22 

1.58 


.06 


.03 

.03 

.09 

9.83 

5.65 

4.18 

.69 


.25 

.06 

.11 

.08 

.47 

2 52 

1.13 

1.39 

.95 


.02 


.02 


.07 

S 72 

2 46 

1.26 

.85 


.03 


.03 


.05 

4 47 

3. 40 

1.07 

1.06 


.03 


.03 


.02 

S fifi 

2 34 

1.32 

.84 


.03 


.03 


.28 

4 82 

3 06 

1.76 

2.08 


.04 


.04 


.12 

fi2 

.86 

2 66 

2.00 






.08 

1 OR 

24 

82 

1. 29 


.14 


.14 


.04 

2 5Q 

15 

2 44 

1.26 


.11 


.11 


.40 

1 12 

R1 

51 

.74 






.19 

4 87 

1 65 

3. 22 

1. 22 


.06 


.06 


.17 

4 OO 

1 fiO 

2 40 

2, 50 






.11 


1 74 

1 3Q 

2 04 






.04 

2 ^4 

2 5-^ 

41 

1 29 


.05 


.05 


.04 

3 

1 44 

2 ! 08 

1.77 






.09 

1 73 

37 

1 36 

1 12 


.02 


.02 


.22 

1 70 

* ^^7 

!83 

77 


.04 


.04 


.72 

1 *^4 

1* Q4 

.38 






.29 


9 46 

8 16 

1. 60 


W 


(*) 


.40 

8. 47 

2. 74 

5.73 

1 .38 


1.07 

.58 

.27 

.22 

.23 

5. 69 

4.88 

.81 

1. 53 


2.00 

.96 

.80 

.24 

. 13 

1 33 

1.33 


1.16 


1.79 

1.01 

.58 

.20 

. 11 

2.97 

1.75 

1.22 

1.72 


1.13 

.76 

.30 

.07 

.07 

8.24 

3.17 

5.07 

1.85 


1.50 

.59 

.78 

. 13 

.36 

7 05 

7.05 


1.50 


.77 

.32 

.33 

. 12 

.27 


5 40 

5 19 

1 21 


. 29 


.29 


.08 


7 17 

1 64 

9 05 


.41 

.21 

.20 


.42 


p Q7 

22 

1 81 


.24 


.24 


.15 

8.28 

7. 97 

.31 

2 ! 15 


.61 


.61 


.02 


> Based on total population of areas estimated from U. S. censuses of 1930 

and 1940. , . . , , , . u u 

* See app. A for the territory and total population included m each urban 

area. Amounts per inhabitant based on figures which relate to territory other 
than that shown in app. A are footnoted. j 

3 Excludes cost of administration; of materials, equipment, and other items 
incident to operation of work programs; and of transient care. 

* Includes statutory aid to veterans administered on basis of need. 

« Figures from the WPA, Division of Statistics: represent earnings of all 
persons employed under the program, including the administrative stan. 


« Not initiated until 1935. 

3 Includes direct and work relief and aid to veterans. 

8 Based on number of areas reporting expenditures for specified type of aid. 
• Less than 1 cent. 

>i> Relates to county. 

n Relates to county exclusive of Yonkers. 

13 Relates to city. 


141 































































































































































































Table C~2n.—Amount per inhabitant ^ of public and private assistance and earnings under specified Federal work 

programs, by urban area, 1934 


Geographic division, State, 
and urban area * 

Total 
public 
and 
private 
funds 3 

Public funds 

Private 
funds ^ 

Total 

General relief ‘ 

Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 

Special types of public assistance 

Total 

Direct 

relief 

Work 

relief 

Civil 
Works 
Pro¬ 
gram » 

Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA « 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

children 

Aid to 
the blind 

Median *... 

$16. 51 

$16.19 

$10. 57 

$6.11 

$3. 63 

$4.90 


$0.61 

$0. 37 

$0. 35 

$0.07 

$0.16 

New England 













Connecticut: 













Brid^piport. 

17. 79 

17. 43 

12. 44 

6 .64 

6. 80 

4. 59 


.40 


.39 

.01 

.36 

TTart.fnrd 

16.12 

14. 48 

10.81 

7.01 

3.80 

3.10 


.57 


.55 

.02 

1.64 


15 28 

15 22 

10. 56 

6. 77 

4.78 

4.07 


.60 


.60 

C) 

.06 


14.46 

13. 66 

9.11 

6 . 78 

3.33 

3.85 


.70 


.67 

.03 

.80 


19.01 

18.67 

10.04 

6.28 

4.76 

8.28 


.35 


.26 

.09 

.34 

Massachusetts: 











Bo.ston ... _ _ 

30.22 

29.12 

21.71 

13.75 

7.96 

4.16 


3.25 

1.67 

1. 61 

.07 

1 .10 

Brockton - _ 

16.60 

16.00 

11.86 

6. 56 

6.30 

2. 54 


1.60 

1.01 

.52 

.07 

.60 

nflmbn’d^ft .. 

16. 65 

16.18 

11.16 

6.05 

6.11 

3.20 


1.82 

1.03 

.70 

.09 

.47 

Fall Rivar . . . 

17. 30 

17. 28 

10. 76 

4.28 

6.48 

4. 73 


1.79 

1. 23 

.48 

.08 

.02 


17. 37 

17.21 

12.89 

4.10 

8.79 

2.76 


1.66 

.97 

.56 

.03 

.16 

Lowell _ 

20. 35 

19. 90 

14.65 

7.01 

7.64 

2. 77 


2. 48 

1. 32 

1.10 

.06 

.45 

Lynn _ 

23. 27 

22.92 

15.95 

6.43 

9.52 

4.06 


2. 91 

2. 22 

.66 

.03 

.35 

Malden _-_ 

16. 21 

16.20 

12.46 

5.90 

6.56 

1.81 


.93 

.80 

.10 

.03 


New Bedford_ 

16. 62 

16. 44 

11.05 

4. 29 

6. 76 

3.27 


2.12 

1.59 

.49 

.04 

.18 

Newton _ 

11.37 

11.11 

7. 21 

2.86 

4. 35 

2.79 


1.11 

.71 

.37 

.03 

.26 

Springfield_ 

21.90 

21. 52 

16. 51 

9. 51 

7.00 

3. 66 


1. 35 

1.09 

.23 

.03 

.38 

Worcester _ _ 

20. 64 

20. 25 

13.92 

6.70 

7.22 

4. 76 


1. 57 

.94 

.69 

.04 

.39 


13.93 

13. 54 

9.68 

2.67 

6.91 

3.48 


.48 


.48 


.39 

Middle Atlantic 










New Jersey: 













Jersey City_ 

17. 21 

17.16 

10.94 

9.64 

1.30 

>0 6. 42 


.80 

.07 

.71 

.02 

.05 

Newark __ 

24. 94 

24. 77 

18.69 

16. 25 

2.44 

10 4. 33 


1.75 

.43 

1.28 

.04 

.17 

Trenton_ 

17. 67 

17.41 

11.39 

10.09 

1.30 

10 4.72 


1.30 

.67 

.68 

.05 

,26 

New York: 













Albany_-_ 

16. 61 

16. 32 

9.73 

3.74 

5.99 

10 6. 68 


.91 

.66 

.31 

.04 

.29 

Buffalo_ 

29.05 

28.77 

21.71 

11.15 

10.66 

6.02 


1.04 

.51 

.49 

.04 

.28 

New Rochelle_ 

26. 75 

26.70 

20.48 

10. 69 

9. 89 

11 6.30 


.92 

.65 

.25 

.02 

.05 

New York. _ 

27. 76 

26. 95 

19. 97 

11. 46 

8.61 

4. 61 


2. 37 

.97 

1.37 

.03 

.81 

Niagara Falls_ 

26. 35 

26. 22 

17.79 

6.72 

12.07 

7.43 


1.00 

.31 

.68 

.01 

.13 

Rochester_ _ 

28.13 

27.86 

19.56 

12. 69 

6.86 

10 6. 49 


1.82 

1.24 

.53 

.05 

.27 

Syracuse__ 

25. 87 

25. 65 

18.03 

8.59 

9.44 

10 6.41 


1. 21 

.90 

.28 

.03 

.22 

Utica_ 

19. 53 

19.09 

11.80 

7.14 

4.66 

6.05 


2.24 

1. 22 

.98 

.04 

.44 

Yonkers_ 

22.14 

21.86 

17.97 

8.29 

9.68 

2.37 


1.61 

.73 

.76 

.02 

.29 

Pennsylvania: 













Allantown _ 

15.02 

14. 98 

10.69 

8.49 

2.10 

3.89 


.60 

.07 

.36 

.07 

.04 

Altoona __ 

13.12 

12. 99 

8. 22 

6. 21 

2. 01 

4.22 


.66 

.07 

.45 

.03 

.13 

Bethlehem__ 

17. 77 

17.67 

11.72 

9.37 

2. 35 

6. 61 


.44 

.07 

.35 

.02 

.10 

Chester_ 

10. 34 

10.29 

7.49 

6.10 

1. 39 

2. 45 


.35 

.07 

.24 

.04 

.05 

Erie _ 

13.76 

13. 76 

9.62 

7.48 

2.14 

3.61 


.53 

.07 

.39 

.07 

(») 

Johnstown _ 

13. 60 

13. 68 

9.14 

7.19 

1.95 

3. 82 


.62 

.07 

.48 

.07 

.02 

Philadelphia_ 

15. 65 

15. 25 

12.99 

11. 30 

1. 69 

1.80 


.46 

.07 

.32 

.07 

.40 

Pittsburgh_ 

20. 77 

20. 56 

16.95 

15.02 

1.93 

3. 04 


.57 

.07 

.43 

.07 

.21 

Reading_ 

14. 94 

14.81 

10. 02 

7. 39 

2. 63 

4.19 


.60 

.07 

.46 

.07 

.13 

Scranton_ 

20. 93 

20. 73 

16. 40 

12. 45 

2. 95 

4.90 


.43 

.07 

.29 

.07 

.20 

Wilkes-Barre_ 

17.75 

17.70 

13. 60 

12. 20 

1.40 

3. 39 


.71 

.07 

.67 

.07 

.06 

North Central 













Illinois: 













Chicago ___ 

20.46 

20.06 

13. 26 

10.17 

3.09 

6.48 


.32 


.20 

.12 

.40 

Springfield_ 

11.67 

11.52 

6. 39 

4.86 

1. 53 

4. 89 


.24 


.05 

.19 

IS 

Indiana: 













Evansville_ 

18.81 

18. 78 

12.77 

6. 28 

7.49 

5.29 


.72 

.62 

. 10 


.03 

Fort Wayne_ 

17. 31 

17. 05 

10. 64 

6. 71 

4.93 

6.03 


.38 

.26 

.12 


.26 

Indianapolis_ 

16. 20 

16. 93 

10.26 

3.77 

6.49 

6.41 


.26 

.19 

.07 


.27 

South Bend_ 

13.91 

13. 87 

7. 74 

4.26 

3.48 

6.19 


.94 

.74 

.20 


.04 

Terre Haute_ 

16. 70 

16. 55 

9.26 

2.34 

6.91 

6.66 


.74 

.63 

. 11 


.16 

Iowa: 













Des Moines_ . 

20. 68 

20. 61 

11.34 

8.12 

3.22 

8.76 


.51 

.04 

.30 

.17 

.07 

Sioux City_ 

13.02 

12.92 

6.21 

3. 76 

1.45 

7.10 


. 61 

.03 

.45 

.13 

.10 

Kansas: 













Kansas City__ 

13. 40 

13.32 

8.45 

1.15 

7.30 

4.87 


(0) 


(«) 


.08 

Topeka_ 

14. 07 

14.00 

8. 20 

1.73 

6.47 

6. 66 


.14 


. 14 


.07 

Wichita __ 

14. 57 

14.50 

9.10 

2.64 

6.46 

6.35 


.05 


.05 


.07 

Michigan: 













Detroit_ 

17.12 

17.02 

10.93 

6.12 

4. 81 

5.40 


.69 

.01 

.68 


.10 

Flint _ 

11. 51 

11.47 

6. 38 

6.18 

1.20 

4.53 


.56 

.02 

.54 


.04 

Grand Rapids_ 

18.24 

18. 20 

12.86 

9.44 

3. 42 

4. 91 


.43 

.02 

.41 


.04 

Pontiac __ 

15. 90 

15.89 

10.63 

7. 91 

2.72 

5. 25 


.01 

.01 



.01 

Saginaw.. _ 

9.84 

9. 67 

4.83 

3.84 

.99 

3.93 


.91 

.04 

.87 


.17 

Minnesota: 













Duluth.. __ 

19.83 

19.64 

10.99 

6.52 

4.47 

7.16 


1.49 

.39 

1.06 

.04 

. 19 

Minneapolis_ 

20. 72 

20.09 

12.07 

7.37 

4.70 

12 6.94 


1.08 

.49 

.56 

.03 

.63 

St. Paul_ 

25. 54 

25.00 

16.01 

8.40 

7.61 

8.00 


.99 

.38 

.67 

.04 

. 54 

Missouri: 













Kansas City_ . . 

10.47 

9.68 

W 5.73 

» 3.68 

IS 2.05 

12 3. 61 


.34 


.08 

.26 

» .79 

St. Louis.... 

16.84 

16.42 

10.08 

8.42 

1.66 

12 6.09 


.25 


.05 

.20 

.42 


See footnotes at end of table. 


142 



















































































































































































Table C-27 .—Amount per inhabitant ‘ of public and private assistance and earninps under specified Federal work 

programs^ by urban area, 1934 —Continued 


Public funds 


Geographic division. State, 
and urban area ^ 

Total 
public 
and 
private 
funds 8 

Total 

General relief ♦ 

Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 

Special tjnpes of public assistance 

Private 
funds f 

Total 

Direct 

relief 

Work 

relief 

Civil 
Works 
Pro¬ 
gram ® 

Projeets 
operated 
bv the 
WPA « 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

children 

Aid to 
the blind 

North CENTEAi^Continued 













Nebraska: Omaha_ 

$16.05 

$15. 39 

$10.46 

$6.45 

$4.01 

$4. 71 


$0. 22 


" $0.18 

$0.04 

$0.66 

Ohio: 










Akron_ 

16.47 

16.38 

9. 57 

6.67 

2.90 

6.48 


.33 

$0.12 

.17 

.04 


Canton_ 

12.79 

12.79 

7.63 

5.16 

2.47 

4.60 


.56 

. 13 

.23 

. 20 

* 

Cincinnati_ 

20.19 

19.78 

12.38 

8. 96 

3.42 

6.59 


.81 

.27 

.44 

. 10 

41 

Cleveland_ 

22. 80 

22.43 

15.08 

12. 53 

2.55 

6. 72 


.63 

.08 

.49 

.06 

^7 

Columbus_ 

16.32 

16.20 

10.10 

6.26 

3.84 

5.41 


.69 

.16 

.37 

.16 

12 

Dayton__ 

15.16 

14.98 

9.47 

7.06 

2.41 

6.04 


.47 

.10 

.27 

. 10 


Springfield___ 

15.92 

15.77 

7.97 

4.99 

2.98 

7.46 


.34 

.14 

.16 

.04 

15 

Toledo_ 

25.67 

25.67 

15.40 

11.38 

4.02 

9.65 


.62 

.19 

.34 

.09 


Youngstown_ 

22.45 

22.41 

12.61 

9.66 

2.95 

9.43 


.37 

.09 

.19 

.09 

.04 

Wisconsin: 







1 ' 






Kenosha_ 

36.89 

36.79 

27.21 

17.17 

10.04 

8.12 


1.46 

.49 

.80 

. 17 

.10 

Madison_ 

21.02 

20.99 

11.00 

6.15 

4.85 

9.33 


.66 


.55 

.11 

.03 

Milwaukee_ 

26.78 

26.53 

15.63 

8.86 

6.77 

9. 60 


1.40 

.35 

.95 

.10 

.25 

Eacine_ 

22. 63 

22.54 

14.96 

12.33 

2.63 

6.48 


1.10 


.95 

.15 

.09 

South Atlantic and South 













Central 













Alabama: 













Birmingham_ 

14.43 

14.43 

9. 52 

5.25 

4.27 

4.91 






(») 

Mobile_ _ 

13 55 

13.55 

8.74 

5. 85 

2.89 

4. 81 






Delaware: Wilmington_ 

11 29 

10.92 

8.04 

7.98 

.06 

1.93 


.95 

.59 

,.36 


.37 

District of Coiumbia: Wash- 













ington . . 

17.73 

17.44 

11.36 

6.39 

4.97 

5.81 


.27 


.27 


.29 

Florida: 













TanksoTivillA 

1.5 ftS 

15. 94 

9.18 

3. 96 

5.22 

6.46 


.30 


.30 


.04 

Miami _ 

8.11 

7.96 

4.47 

1.16 

3.31 

3.28 


.21 


.21 


.15 

Georgia: Atlanta.- __ 

17.62 

17. 52 

12.39 

8. 62 

3.77 

5.13 






.10 

Kentucky: Louisville. .. 

6. 23 

5.80 

12 3.05 

12 1.09 

121.96 

2.57 


.18 

(») 

.17 

n.Ol 

n. 43 

Louisiana: 











TCaw OrlftftTiR 

16 .54 

16. 29 

10.67 

3.29 

7.38 

5.60 


.02 



.02 

.25 

Shrp.vftport . 

6 02 

5.88 

2. 34 

.49 

1.85 

3.48 


.06 


.02 

.04 

.14 

Maryland: Baltimore_ _ 

19.10 

18.97 

15.49 

13.90 

1. 59 

3. 21 


.27 

.06 

.12 

.09 

.13 

North Carolina: 














ft Oft 

9.00 

5. 76 

3. 62 

2.14 

3.23 


.01 


.01 



nhflrintt.p. 

7 22 

6.86 

3.45 

1.82 

1.63 

3.39 


.02 


.02 


.36 


» 64 

8. 62 

5.42 

2.83 

2. 59 

3.18 


.02 


.02 


.02 


6 46 

6.25 

3.73 

2.04 

1.69 

2. 50 


.02 


.02 


.21 


R ft3 

8. 59 

3.46 

.89 

2.57 

6.09 


.04 


.04 


.34 


13.35 

13.25 

7.26 

2.15 

5.11 

5.99 






.10 

Tennessee: 











10.67 

10.62 

5.06 

3. 49 

1. 57 

5.37 


. 19 


.19 


.05 


7. 21 

7.09 

3. 94 

2.00 

1.94 

3.02 


.13 

. 

.13 


.12 


7.39 

7.27 

4 10 

2.63 

1.47 

3.17 






. 12 

Texas: 












8 03 

8.79 

5.23 

3. 65 

1.58 

3. 50 


.06 


.06 


.14 


10 

10.91 

4 87 

2 30 

2.57 

6.04 






.01 


12 73 

12.70 

8 1ft 

3 78 

4.41 

4.51 






.03 


s! 28 

8.25 

5.04 

3.43 

1.61 

3.16 


.05 


.05 


.03 


11.41 

11.36 

6.39 

3.43 

2.96 

4.97 






.05 

Virginia: 











7 41 

7.33 

3. 70 

1.81 

1.89 

3.61 


.02 


.02 


.08 


7 46 

6.93 

2.93 

1. 89 

1.04 

3.95 


.05 


.05 


.53 


7 42 

7.24 

4 3ft 

2 31 

1.99 

2.94 






.18 

West Virginia: Huntington... 

16!97 

16. 91 

10.42 

4 . 85 

5.57 

6.49 






.06 

Mountain and Pacific 













California: 














18. 41 

18.26 

12.55 

8.02 

4.53 

4.47 


1.24 

. 65 

.33 

.26 

• 15 


16.18 

16.07 

9. 51 

5.29 

4. 22 

4.44 


2.12 

1.10 

.75 

.27 

.11 


8.79 

8.64 

3.07 

.96 

2.11 

3.72 


1.85 

1.00 

.64 

.21 

.15 


17. 85 

17.79 

11.25 

4.22 

7.03 

5.27 


1.27 

.89 

.29 

.09 

.06 


19.93 

19.47 

12. 29 

7.60 

4.69 

5. 71 


1.47 

.63 

.69 

.15 

.46 


22.27 

22.18 

14.68 

8.40 

6.28 

5.74 


1.76 

1.32 

.32 

.12 

.09 


21 47 

21.40 

14.28 

9.12 

5.16 

6.32 


.80 

.54 

.26 


.07 


18 g7 

18.43 

13.12 

7.40 

5. 72 

5.01 


.30 

.14 

.16 


.44 

LttXI* LJdl 1/ Vy 11/ Jf —— 

Washington: 

15.81 

15.70 

9.33 

6.77 

2.56 

6.02 


.35 

.06 

.21 

.08 

• 11 

Tacoma.. ... — 

15.88 

15.88 

10.00 

8.27 

1.73 

5.16 


.72 

.25 

.47 




1 Based on total population of areas estimated from U. S. censuses of 1930 
and 1940. , , . , , , . . 

> See app. A for the territory and total population included in each urban 
area. Amounts per inhabitant based on figures which relate to territory 
other than that shown in app. A are footnoted. 

> Excludes cost of administration; of materials, equipment, and other items 
incident to operation of work programs; and of transient care. 

* Includes statutory aid to veterans administered on basis of need. 

» Figures from the WPA, Division of Statistics; represent earnings of all 
persons employed under the program, including the administrative staff. 


8 Not initiated until 1935. 

7 Includes direct and work relief and aid to veterans. 

8 Based on number of areas reporting expenditures for specified type of aid. 
* Less than 1 cent. 

1“ Eelates to county. 

1* Eelates to county exclusive of Yonkers. 

Eelates to city. 


143 





































































































































































Table C—28 .—Amount per inhabitant ' of public and priiHite assistance and earnings under specified Federal work 

programs, by urban area, 1935 


Geographic division, State 
and urban area • 


Median *__ 

New England 

Connecticut: 

Bridgeport... 

Hartford-.-.. 

New Britain_ 

New Haven__ 

Maine: Portland_ 

Massachusetts: 

Boston.... 

Brockton__ 

Cambridge__ 

Fall River__ 

Lawrence.. 

Lowell.-.. 

Lynn___ 

Malden.. 

New Bedford.. 

Newton_._ 

Springfield__ 

Worcester_ 

Rhode Island: Providence. 

Middle Atlantic 

New Jersey: 

Jersey City. 

Newark.. 

Trenton.... 

New York: 

Albany.... 

Buffalo_ 

New Rochelle.. 

New York_ 

Niagara Falls.... 

Rochester.. 

Syracuse.__ 

Utica____ 

Yonkers_ 

Pennsylvania: 

Allentown.. 

Altoona__ 

Bethlehem__ 

Chester_ 

Erie... 

Johnstown_ 

Philadelphia_ 

Pittsburgh_ 

Reading.. 

Scranton.. 

Wilkes-Barre_ 

North Central 
Illinois: 

Chicago_ 

Springfield. 

Indiana: 

Evansville_ 

Fort Wayne. 

Indianapolis_ 

South Bend.. 

Terre Haute.. 

Iowa: 

Des Moines. 

Sioux City.. 

Kansas: 

Kansas City_ 

Topeka_ 

Wichita.. 

Michigan: 

Detroit--.. 

Flint.-.. 

Grand Rapids_ 

Pontiac.... 

Saginaw... 

Minnesota: 

Duluth.. 

Minneapolis_ 

St. Paul.. 

Missouri: 

Kansas City. 

St. Louis_ 


Public funds 


Total 
public 
and 
private 
funds 1 

Total 

General relief ‘ 

Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 

Special types of public assistance 

Total 

Direct 

relief 

W'ork 

relief 

Civil 
Works 
Pro¬ 
gram * 

Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA e 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

children 

Aid to 
the blind 

$17.37 

$17.28 

$13. 76 

$7. 65 

$4.14 


$1.73 

$1.26 

$0.95 

$0. 35 

$0.08 

18.08 

17. 75 

15.87 

3.41 

12.46 


»1.43 

.45 


.44 

.01 

20. 65 

19.22 

16. 56 

8. 50 

8.06 


2. 05 

.61 


.58 

.03 

17.16 

17.12 

14.78 

5.99 

8.79 


1.86 

.48 


.47 

.01 

14.04 

13.42 

11.28 

6. 75 

4. 53 


»1.48 

.66 


.64 

.02 

15. 75 

15.29 

14.00 

5.87 

8.13 


*.91 

.38 


.28 

.10 

36.09 

34.97 

29.69 

11.36 

18.33 


1.86 

3.42 

1.76 

1.68 

.08 

24.16 

23.44 

20.02 

6. u8 

13.94 


1.19 

2.23 

1.59 

.56 

.08 

21.00 

20.56 

17.45 

6. 72 

10.73 


1.16 

1.95 

1.16 

.69 

.10 

23.76 

23.73 

19. 99 

7. 77 

12. 22 


1.76 

1.98 

1.40 

.50 

.08 

18.47 

18.31 

15.63 

2.81 

12.82 


.87 

1.81 

1.22 

.66 

.03 

26. 55 

26.15 

21.75 

7.58 

14. 17 


1.60 

2.80 

1.65 

1.08 

.07 

23.58 

23. 25 

19. 38 

7.10 

12.28 


.51 

3. 36 

2. 57 

.76 

.03 

22.70 

22.69 

19. 77 

5. 93 

13.84 


1.36 

1.56 

1.08 

.44 

.04 

21.17 

21.00 

17.12 

5.10 

12.02 


1.22 

2. 66 

2.08 

.53 

.05 

11.23 

10. 94 

9.17 

3.81 

5. 36 


.40 

1.37 

.87 

.48 

.02 

27.60 

27. 25 

24.56 

14.02 

10.54 


.94 

1.75 

1.47 

.25 

.03 

23.19 

22.83 

19.96 

9. 57 

10. 39 


.91 

1.96 

1.18 

.73 

.05 

16.40 

16.05 

13.44 

3.66 

9.78 


« 2.00 

.61 

.04 

.67 


17.61 

17. 57 

14.08 

1 

13.74 

.34 


*2.27 

1.22 

.47 

.73 

.02 

23.69 

23. 54 

19. 63 

19.10 

.53 


» 1.91 

2.00 

.55 

1.41 

.04 

19.27 

19.19 

15.86 

15.86 



» 1.89 

1.44 

.64 

.74 

.06 

14.31 

14.07 

11.59 

4.91 

6. 68 


*1. 56 

.92 

.58 

.30 

.04 

34.46 

34.19 

29.81 

17.65 

12.16 


3. 23 

1.15 

.54 

.57 

.04 

28.26 

28.22 

25. 30 

14.89 

10.41 


1.80 

1.12 

.78 

.32 

.02 

32.29 

31.73 

20. 58 

14.44 

6.14 


8. 75 

2.40 

1.03 

1.34 

.03 

25.04 

24.90 

22.23 

11.38 

10.85 


«1.64 

1.03 

.34 

.69 


28.13 

28.02 

24. 05 

15. 72 

8. 33 


« 1.77 

2.20 

1.53 

.61 

.06 

25. 67 

25.46 

22. 54 

11.85 

10.69 


« 1.58 

1.34 

1.03 

.28 

.03 

18.89 

18.54 

15.19 

8.88 

6.31 


«.90 

2.45 

1.34 

1.06 

.05 

24.29 

24.00 

21.34 

10.15 

11.19 


1.05 

1.61 

.82 

.77 

.02 

21.44 

21.40 

17.43 

14.01 

3.42 


2. 55 

1.42 

.93 

.35 

.14 

18.54 

18.41 

13.82 

10.81 

3.01 


3.18 

1.41 

.95 

.36 

.10 

. 22.37 

22.28 

17.88 

14.85 

3.03 


3. 06 

1.34 

.96 

.34 

.04 

13. 25 

13.21 

10.14 

9.19 

.95 


1.81 

1.26 

.91 

.25 

.10 

21. 70 

21.70 

16.45 

13.71 

2.74 


3. 75 

1.50 

.94 

.43 

.13 

21.23 

21.21 

15.96 

13.18 

2. 78 


3. 72 

1.53 

.93 

.47 

.13 

24.52 

24. 22 

22.35 

20.46 

1.89 


.47 

1.40 

.95 

.32 

.13 

29.16 

29.00 

25.44 

22. 39 

3.05 


2.00 

1.56 

.95 

.48 

. 13 

16.66 

16.54 

13.07 

10.11 

2. 96 


1.84 

1.63 

.99 

.49 

.15 

27. 75 

27. 57 

22. 26 

20.27 

1.99 


3. 76 

1.55 

.97 

.44 

. 14 

29.93 

29.89 

23.70 

20.85 

2.85 


4.56 

1.63 

.96 

.54 

.13 

18.03 

17. 75 

15.82 

12.65 

3.17 


11 1. 58 

.35 


.23 

. 12 

10.39 

10.18 

9.06 

6.28 

2.78 


.89 

.23 


.04 

. 19 

20.03 

19. 98 

12.82 

6.01 

6.81 


5.83 

1.33 

1.22 

. 11 


14.01 

13. 71 

8. 48 

4.36 

4.12 


4.61 

.62 

.48 

. 14 


15.97 

15.70 

10. 55 

5.08 

5.47 


4.52 

.63 

. 51 

. 12 


15.44 

15.36 

9.14 

5.00 

4.14 


4.88 

1.34 

1.11 

.23 


17.57 

17.44 

9.81 

3.06 

6. 75 


6.10 

1.53 

1.43 

. 10 


17.06 

16.99 

13.70 

8.53 

5.17 


2.33 

.96 

.50 

.30 

.16 

11.42 

11.33 

8.63 

6.09 

2.54 


1.71 

.99 

.49 

.37 

.13 

17. 79 

17.78 

15.31 

4.27 

11.04 


2.47 

(10) 


(10) 


12.74 

12.66 

10. 75 

3.16 

7.59 


1. 75 

. 16 


. 16 


14.00 

13. 93 

12. 35 

4.65 

7.70 


1.54 

.04 


.04 


13.14 

13.05 

10. 75 

7.28 

3.47 


1.36 

.94 

. 11 

.83 


10. 73 

10.70 

8.91 

7. 75 

1.16 


1.38 

.41 

.41 



18.94 

18.92 

14. 75 

12.34 

2.41 


3.60 

.57 

. 15 

.42 


10.47 

10.46 

9.13 

8. 25 

.88 


1.16 

. 17 

.17 



8.30 

8.16 

6.39 

5. 70 

.69 


.77 

1.00 

.20 

.80 


23.50 

23.27 

17.35 

9.27 

8.08 


4.16 

1. 76 

. 57 

1 14 

05 

20.26 

19.69 

15.98 

9.23 

6. 75 


2.34 

1.37 

.73 

.60 

l04 

27.17 

26.83 

21.54 

13. 51 

8.03 


4.20 

1.09 

.48 

.56 

.05 

11.08 

10.61 

>1 8.93 

>i 7.42 

i> 1.51 


1.35 

.33 


07 


15.82 

15.51 

13. 72 

12.32 

1.40 


1.51 

.28 


.07 

.21 


See footnotes at end of table. 


Private 
funds t 


$0.13 


.33 

1.43 

.04 

.62 

.46 


1.12 

.72 

.44 

.03 

.16 

.40 

.33 

.01 

.17 

.29 

.35 

.36 

.35 


.04 

.15 

.08 


.24 

.27 

.04 

.56 

.14 

.11 

.21 

.35 

.29 


( 10 ) 


.04 
.13 . 

.09 I 
.04 ! 


.02 

.30 

.16 

.12 

.18 

.04 


.28 

.21 / 

.05 ‘ 

.30 
.27 i 
.08 1 
.13 I 

.07 , 

.09 , 

.01 : 
.08 ) 
.07 j 

.09 

.03 

.02 

.01 

.14 

.23 

.57 

.34 

11.47 
.31 


144 

















































































































































































Table C-28. Amount per inhabitant » of public and private assistance and earnings under specified Federal work 

programs, by urban area, 1935 —Continued 


Geographic division, State, 
and urban area > 


North Central— Con. 

Nebraska: Omaha.. 

Ohio: 

Akron.. 

Canton....... 

Cincinnati.. 

Cleveland_ 

Columbus_ 

Dayton... 

Springfield___ 

Toledo... 

Youngstown.. 

Wisconsin: 

Kenosha.... 

Madison....... 

Milwaukee.. 

Racine___ 

South Atlantic and 
South Central 

Alabama: 

Birmingham.. 

Mobile.. 

Delaware: Wilmington_ 

District of Columbia: Wash¬ 
ington..... 

Florida: 

Jacksonville_ 

Miami_____ 

Georgia: Atlanta... 

Kentucky: Louisville_ 

Louisiana: 

New Orleans___ 

Shreveport_ 

Maryland: Baltimore_ 

North Carolina: 

Asheville.. 

Charlotte_ 

Greensboro___ 

Winston-Salem_ 

Oklahoma: Tulsa... 

South Carolina: Charleston... 
Tennessee: 

Knoxville___ 

Memphis___ 

Nashville..... 

Texas: 

Dallas... 

El Paso__ 

Fort Worth_ 

Houston_ 

San Antonio... 

Virginia: 

Norfolk..... 

Richmond.. 

Roanoke_ 

West Virginia: Huntington... 

Mountain and Pacific 
California: 

Los Angeles_ 

Oakland__ 

Sacramento_ 

San Diego..... 

San Francisco.. 

Colorado: Denver... 

Oregon: Portland_ 

Utah: Salt Lake City_ 

Washington: 

Seattle.. 

Tacoma.. 


Public funds 


Total 
public 
and 
private 
funds 3 

Total 

G 

eneral relief ‘ 

Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 

Special types of public assistance 

Total 

Direct 

relief 

Work 

relief 

Civil 
Works 
Pro¬ 
gram » 

Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA « 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

children 

Aid to 
the blind 

$20.94 

$20. 41 

$18.35 

$10.38 

$7.97 


$1.84 

$0. 22 


$n ]9 


16.80 

15. 71 

10.67 

8.30 

2.37 


3.61 

1.43 

$1.21 

. 18 

04 

12.15 

12.15 

7.61 

6.68 

1.93 


2.47 

2.07 

1.70 

.22 

' 15 

23.18 

22.81 

16.93 

14.09 

2. 84 


3.17 

2. 71 

2.17 

.44 

10 

25.13 

24. 78 

20.14 

17.77 

2.37 


3.02 

1.62 

1.06 

.50 

Ofi 

18.07 

17.98 

12.06 

9. 27 

2.79 


3. 22 

2.70 

2.18 

.37 

15 

18.15 

18.08 

12.79 

10.88 

1.91 


3.20 

2.09 

1.72 

.27 

. 10 

15. 76 

15.66 

9.90 

7.81 

2.09 


3. 46 

2.30 

2.10 

.16 

04 

22.13 

22.10 

16.24 

13. 48 

2.76 


3. 52 

2.34 

1.93 

.33 

.08 

19.76 

19.75 

14. 22 

11.60 

2.62 

. 

... 4.23 

1.30 

1.01 

.20 

.09 

33.07 

32.92 

27.39 

22. 51 

4.88 


3.90 

1.63 

.57 

.84 

. 22 

14.89 

14. 86 

12.00 

8.53 

3.47 


2.11 

.75 

.02 

.61 

. 12 

22. 99 

22. 77 

17.82 

12. 52 

5.30 


3.38 

1.57 

.50 

.96 

. 11 

19.18 

18.98 

15.96 

11.74 

4.22 


1.88 

1.14 


1.01 

.13 

14.03 

14.03 

10.15 

3.76 

6.39 


3. 88 



9.92 

9.86 

7. 46 

2.79 

4.67 


2.40 





8.40 

8.04 

5.95 

6.81 

.14 


1.16 

.93 

.58 

.35 


12.48 

12. 24 

10. 41 

6.08 

5.33 


1.57 

.26 


. 26 


7. 76 

7.72 

5.73 

2.15 

3.58 


1.64 

.35 


.35 

(10) 

2. 97 

2. 74 

2.02 

.58 

1.44 


.48 

.24 


.24 

13.88 

13. 75 

11.78 

6.33 

6. 45 


1.97 





4.84 

4. 45 

11 3. 51 

» 1.87 

» 1. 64 


.65 

.29 


.27 

11 .02 

21.35 

21.11 

18. 45 

5.03 

13.42 


2.66 



2. 68 

2.50 

2.00 

.68 

1.32 


.43 

.07 


.04 

0.^ 

13.36 

13.18 

12.18 

11.24 

.94 


«.73 

.27 

.07 

.10 

.10 

7. 71 

7.71 

7.04 

4.11 

2.93 


.65 

.02 


.02 


4. 55 

4. 28 

3. 79 

1.38 

2.41 


.47 

.02 


.02 


6.23 

6.22 

6. 78 

2.10 

3.68 


.42 

.02 


.02 


5.08 

5.05 

4.41 

1.62 

2. 79 


.61 

.03 


.03 


5.14 

4.76 

3.08 

.90 

2.18 


1.65 

.03 


.03 

(10) 

6.35 

6.27 

4.67 

.56 

4.11 


.60 



7.94 

7.91 

6.74 

3.26 

3. 48 


.97 

.20 


.20 


6. 51 

6.37 

5.23 

1.92 

3.31 


1.01 

. 13 


. 13 


7.14 

7.12 

6.05 

3.35 

2.70 


1.07 





4.39 

4.28 

3. 82 

1.41 

2.41 


.40 

.06 


.06 


6.12 

6.10 

5.04 

2.22 

2. 82 


1.06 





10.35 

10.32 

8. 11 

5.00 

3.11 


2. 2] 





5.36 

5. 33 

4. 55 

3.11 

1.44 


. 73 

.05 


.05 


7.11 

7.06 

6. 44 

3. 54 

2.90 


.61 





8.66 

8.59 

7. 46 

2.31 

5.15 


1.11 

.02 


.02 


6. 83 

6. 40 

6. 28 

2.11 

3.17 


1.06 

.06 


.06 


7.42 

7. 42 

6.02 

.39 

5.63 


1.40 

(10) 


(10) 


16.39 

16.37 

13.86 

7.82 

6.04 


2.51 



25.23 

25.12 

21.98 

14.98 

7.00 


1. 58 

1.56 

.86 

.36 

.34 

21.74 

21.63 

17. 77 

7. 21 

10. 56 


1.46 

2. 40 

1.31 

.79 

.30 

15. 70 

15. 54 

12.26 

2. 26 

9.99 


1.32 

1.97 

1.08 

.67 

.22 

29. 39 

29. 32 

. 25.62 

11.18 

14.44 


2.09 

1.61 

1.15 

.33 

.13 

23.52 

2.3.14 

19.26 

10. 21 

9.05 


2.15 

1.73 

.86 

.71 

.16 

21.44 

21.34 

16. 54 

11.17 

5.37 


1.23 

3. 57 

3.11 

.34 

.12 

17.78 

17. 73 

14. 27 

7.15 

7.12 


2. 20 

1.26 

1.01 

.25 


16.73 

16.28 

13. 79 

9.60 

4.19 


2.11 

.38 

.15 

.23 


11.80 

11.65 

9.87 

7. 72 

2.15 


.87 

.91 

.55 

.25 

.11 

14.65 

14. 65 

11. 66 

10.40 

1. 26 


1.71 

1.28 

.89 

.26 

. 13 


Private 
funds ’ 


$0.53 

.09 

10 ) 

.37 

.35 

.09 

.07 

.10 

.03 

.01 

.16 

.03 

.22 

.20 


.06 

.36 


.24 


.04 

.23 

.13 

39 

.24 

.08 

.18 


.27 

.01 

.03 

.38 

.08 

.03 

.14 

.02 

.11 

.02 

.03 

.03 

.06 

.07 

.43 

( 10 ) 

.02 


.11 

.11 

.16 

.07 

.38 

.10 

.05 

.45 

.15 


I Based on total population of areas estimated from U. S. censuses of 1930 
and 1940. 

> See app. A for the territory and total population included in each urban 
area. Amounts per inhabitant based on figures which relate to territory 
other than that shown in app. A are footnoted. 

3 Excludes cost of administration; of materials, equipment, and other items 
incident to operation of work programs; and of transient care. 

* Includes statutory aid to veterans administered on basis of need. 

3 Terminated in 1934. 

« Figures from the WPA, Division of Statistics; represent earnings of 


persons employed on projects operated by the WPA within these areas; 
figures are not available for earnings of persons employed on projects other 
than those operated by the WPA. 

’’ Includes direct and work relief and aid to veterans. 

8 Based on number of areas reporting expenditures for specified type of aid. 
• Relates to county. 

18 Less than 1 cent. 

11 Relates to city. 

13 Relates to Baltimore County as well as the city of Baltimore. 


145 














































































































































































Table C^29.—Amount per inhabitant * of public and private assistance and earnings under specified Federal work 

programs, by urban area, 1936 


Geographic division, State, 
and urban area ’ 

Total 
public 
and 
private 
funds ’ 

Public funds 

Private 
funds * 

Total 

General relief * 

Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 

Special types of public assistance 3 

Total 

Direct 

relief 

Work 

relief 

Civil 
Works 
Pro¬ 
gram 3 

Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA « 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

children 

Aid to 
the blind 

Median»_ 

$21.48 

$21.40 

$3. 69 

$3. 44 

$0.03 


$14. 28 

$1.80 

$1.21 

$0. 43 

$0.06 

$0.13 

New England 













Connecticut: 













Bridgeport 

15.85 

15.53 

2.75 

1.88 

.87 


1011.40 

1.38 

.84 

.53 

.01 

.32 

TT nrt'ford 

17.46 

16.18 

4. 67 

4. 64 

.03 


9. 64 

1.87 

1 . 28 

.57 

.02 

1 . 28 

New Britain__ 

17.92 

17.87 

3.12 

2 . 21 

.91 


13. 44 

1. 31 

.87 

.44 

O') 

.05 

New Haven 

16. 66 

16.19 

4. 58 

4.58 



10 9. 67 

1.94 

1. 27 

.65 

.02 

.47 

Maine: Portland 

13.23 

12. 99 

4. 66 

4.66 



10 7. 66 

.67 

.22 

.31 

.14 

.24 

Massachusetts: 













Boston 

41.79 

40. 59 

9. 34 

9.26 

.08 


27.27 

3.98 

2.24 

1 . 66 

.08 

1.20 

Brockton_ 

27.85 

27.29 

6 .53 

6 . 53 

(») 


16. 62 

4.14 

3.36 

.70 

.08 

.56 

Cambridge___ 

19.03 

18.62 

6.55 

6 . 55 


9. 67 

2. 40 

1.48 

.83 

.09 

,41 

Fall River_ 

30.98 

30. 96 

5. 85 

5. 79 

.06 


22. 29 

2 . 82 

2.18 

.56 

.08 

.02 

Lawrence_ _ 

22. 35 

22.15 

3.01 

3.00 

.01 


16. 73 

2.41 

1.80 

.58 

.03 

.20 

Lowell___ 

31.83 

31.50 

6 . 85 

6 . 72 

. 13 


21.09 

3. 56 

2. 38 

1.10 

.08 

.33 

Lynn_ 

27. 64 

27.30 

5. 79 

5. 79 

(11) 


16. 72 

4. 79 

3. 99 

.78 

.02 

.34 

Malden __ 

22.95 

22. 94 

6 . 89 

6.89 

(U) 


13.84 

2.21 

1.69 

.48 

.04 

.01 

New Bedford_ 

24. 88 

24.74 

5.06 

5.03 

.03 


15. 52 

4.16 

3. 52 

.59 

.05 

.14 

Newton, _ 

13.93 

13. 65 

4. 79 

4. 79 

(11) 


6.81 

2.05 

1.34 

.69 

.02 

.28 

Springfield _ 

27. 74 

27.41 

8 .55 

8 . 53 

.02 


16. 67 

2.19 

1.88 

.28 

.03 

.33 

Worcester_ _ 

24.19 

23.92 

8.84 

8 . 44 

.40 


12 . 61 

2.47 

1 . 61 

.81 

.05 

.27 

Rhodft Tsland r Providpinnft 

18. 71 

18.40 

4.60 

2.21 

2.39 


1012. 51 

1. 29 

.70 

.59 


.31 

Middle Atlantic 











New Jersey: 













Jersey City__ 

28.00 

27.96 

4.86 

4. 86 



10 21. 77 

1.33 

.55 

.75 

.03 

.04 

Newark...'_ 

26. 85 

26. 73 

9.16 

9.16 



10 15.21 

2. 36 

.74 

1.58 

.04 

.12 

Trenton_ 

27.11 

26.95 

5.85 

5.85 



1019. 37 

1.73 

.85 

.82 

.06 

.16 

New York: 













Albany__ 

16. 33 

16.12 

2.47 

2. 32 

. 15 


1012. 64 

1.01 

.69 

.27 

.05 

.21 

Buffalo___ .. 

34. 70 

34.44 

9.41 

9.19 

. 22 


23. 74 

1. 29 

.67 

.58 

.04 

.26 

New Rochelle__ ... 

27.24 

27.21 

13. 70 

13. 34 

.36 


11.90 

1 . 61 

1.18 

.41 

.02 

.03 

New York_ 

43.03 

42. 62 

12. 49 

12.48 

.01 


27. 68 

2.45 

1.09 

1. 33 

.03 

.41 

Niagara Falls __ 

18.64 

18. 52 

4.99 

4.95 

04 


10 12. 41 

1.12 

.42 

.70 


.12 

Rochester... _ 

29. 27 

29.14 

9. 65 

9.48 

. 17 


10 16.91 

2. 58 

1.82 

.70 

.06 

. 13 

Syracuse__ 

28.59 

28. 38 

8.06 

7. 76 

. 30 


1018. 72 

1 . 60 

1 . 26 

.31 

.03 

.21 

Utica_ 

18. 64 

18. 35 

6.78 

6 . 45 

. 33 


10 8. 86 

2. 71 

1. 53 

1.15 

,03 

.29 

Yonkers_ ... 

26. 88 

26.68 

7.34 

6.75 

.59 


17.40 

1.94 

1.11 

.80 

.03 

.20 

Pennsylvania: 













Allentown__ _ 

24. 77 

24. 72 

6.76 

6 . 76 



16.18 

1.78 

1.17 

.34 

.27 

.05 

Altoona_ 

25.58 

25.50 

3.91 

3. 91 



19. 71 

1 . 88 

1.18 

.35 

.35 

.08 

Bethlehem__ 

26. 23 

26.15 

5. 89 

5.89 



18. 62 

1. 64 

1.08 

.34 

.22 

.08 

Chester_ 

18. 29 

18. 22 

2. 34 

2.34 



14. 34 

1. 54 

1.03 

.30 

.21 

.07 

Erie__ 

31.93 

31.93 

6 . 46 

6 . 46 



23. 27 

2.20 

1.36 

.47 

.37 

O') 

Johnstown_ 

26.23 

26.18 

5.03 

5.03 



19. 34 

1.81 

1.14 

.43 

.24 

.05 

Philadelphia.. .. _ 

28. 70 

28.41 

12. 64 

12. 64 



13. 77 

2.00 

1. 31 

.39 

.30 

.29 

Pittsburgh_ 

34.47 

34. 28 

9.54 

9.54 



22 . 81 

1.93 

1.17 

.53 

.23 

.19 

Readingr___ 

21.08 

20.93 

4.12 

4.12 



14. 87 

1.94 

1.11 

.51 

.32 

.15 

Scranton_ 

36. 82 

36.64 

9.09 

9. 09 



25.75 

1.80 

1.12 

.43 

.25 

.18 

Wilkes-Barre_ 

38.01 

37. 96 

10.06 

10.06 



26. 04 

1 . 86 

1.09 

.51 

.26 

.05 

Noeth Centsal 













Rlinois: 













Chicago_ 

24. 66 

24.38 

7.24 

7.23 

.01 


13 16. 50 

.64 

.29 

.23 

.12 

.28 

Springfield_ 

17.04 

16.84 

3.54 

3.54 



12. 31 

.99 

.61 

.11 

.27 

.20 

Indiana: 













Evansville_ 

27.18 

27.13 

2.43 

2. 43 



23.06 

1. 64 

1.41 

.18 

.05 

.05 

Fort Wa 3 Tie_ 

16. 97 

16. 76 

1.09 

1.09 



14. 75 

.92 

.67 

.21 

.04 

.21 

Indianapolis__ 

23.45 

23.20 

3.11 

3.11 



18. 81 

1.28 

1.08 

.12 

.08 

.25 

South Bend__ 

21.70 

21.65 

1.46 

1.46 

CO 


18. 74 

1.45 

1.22 

.21 

.02 

.05 

Terre Haute__ _ 

31.17 

31.05 

1.45 

1.45 


27. 78 

1.82 

1.66 

.12 

.04 

.12 

Iowa: 













Des Moines_ 

25. 66 

25.60 

4.85 

4.77 

.08 


18. 29 

2.46 

2.02 

.26 

.18 

.06 

Sioux City_ 

19.73 

19. 61 

4.31 

4. 31 

00 


13. 73 

1.57 

1.12 

.33 

.12 

.12 

Kansas: 












Kanses City 

23.14 

23.14 

2.20 

2.20 



20. 94 

O') 


O') 


O') 

Tnpekn 

15.17 

15.09 

2.27 

2. 27 



12. 69 

. 13 


.13 


.08 

Wiebita 

16. 65 

16. 59 

3. 89 

3.89 



12 . 66 

.04 


.04 


.06 

Michigan: 













Detroit__ 

14. 76 

14. 67 

4.48 

4.48 

00 


8 . 54 

1. 65 

.58 

1 . 06 

.01 

.09 

Flint _ 

12.24 

12 . 21 

3. 50 

3. 47 

.03 


7. 26 

1.45 

1 . 21 

.24 


.03 

Grand Rapids_ 

24. 57 

24.54 

4.06 

4.02 

.04 


18.69 

1.79 

1.26 

.52 

.01 

.03 

Pnntian 

10 . 62 

10 . 61 

2.74 

2. 63 

. 11 


6 . 32 

1.55 

.99 

.56 

O') 

.01 

Saginaw_ 

9. 63 

9. 54 

2.73 

2.70 

.03 


5. 32 

1.49 

.88 

.61 

(") 

.09 

Minnesota: 












Dnlnth 

35. 61 

35. 35 

5.09 

5.09 

00 


26. 82 

3. 44 

2 . 22 

1.17 

.05 

.26 

Minneapolis_ 

30.13 

29.60 

8 . 25 

8.25 

00 


18. 44 

2.91 

2.16 

.71 

.04 

.53 

St. Paul_ 

36.45 

36.20 

8 . 79 

8 . 78 

.01 


25. 32 

2.09 

1.51 

.53 

.05 

.25 

Missouri: 













City .. . 

15. 45 

15.03 

13. 94 

13.94 



12. 83 

1 . 26 

.90 

.07 

.29 

». 42 

St. Louis.__ 

19.35 

19.06 

2.87 

2.87 



15.41 

.78 

.50 

.07 

.21 

.29 


See footnotes at end of table. 


146 






























































































































































Table C-29. Amount per inhabitant i of public and private assistance and earnings under specified Federal work 

programs, by urban area, 1936 —Continued 


Geographic division, State, 
and urban area > 


Total 
public 
and 
private 
funds > 


Public funds 


Total 


General relief * 





Total 

Direct 

relief 

Work 

relief 

Works 
Pro¬ 
gram • 

North Central— Continued 







Nebraska: Omaha 

$26. 43 

$25. 94 

$2.67 

$2.67 



Ohio: 






Akron_ 

26.13 

26. 01 

3 83 

^ Ifi 

$0 67 


Canton_ 

16. 26 

16. 26 

2. 77 

2 77 

('lO 


Cincinnati_ 

29. 67 

29 29 

79 . 


34 


Cleveland___ 

34.05 

33.68 

7. 75 

7 . 41 

34 


Columbus_ 

25. 53 

25. 48 

3. 88 

3 78 

in 


Dayton.... 

24.66 

24.61 

3.85 

3 84 

.01 


Springfield _ 

21. 27 

21.18 

3.10 

3.10 


Toledo__ 

34. 84 

34. 82 

5 34 

5^27 

07 


Youngstown_ 

25. 89 

25. 88 

3 39 

3.36 

.03 


Wisconsin: 





Kenosha__ 

40. 64 

40.56 

7. 24 

7. 24 



Madison_ 

18.98 

18. 95 

3. 24 

3. 24 



Milwaukee_ 

31.65 

31.48 

5.64 

5. 54 



Racine... 

20.38 

20.22 

4.08 

4.08 



South Atlantic and 






South Central 







Alabama: 







Birmingham__ 

14.39 

14.39 

.22 

.22 



Mobile__ 

11. 25 

11.23 

.08 

.08 



Delaware: Wilmington. . _ 

11.49 

10.98 

2.05 

2.05 



District of Columbia: Wash- 







ington . ... 

12.17 

11.90 

2.69 

2.59 



Florida: 






J acksonville_ 

10. 75 

10.69 

.47 

.36 

11 


Miami_ 

4.68 

4.47 

.31 

. 27 

.04 


Georgia: Atlanta.... 

15.38 

15. 25 

1.61 

1.61 


Kentucky: Louisville. 

5. 29 

5.00 

1.14 

W 1.12 

». 02 


Louisiana: 





New Orleans_ 

25. 48 

25.25 

1.35 

1 35 



Shreveport _ 

2.15 

2.11 

.42 

.42 



Maryland: Baltimore.. . 

12.38 

12.03 

9. 

2. 26 



North Carolina: 







Asheville _... 

7.63 

7.63 

1.19 

1.19 



Charlotte_ _ 

5. 33 

5.13 

.36 

. 36 



Greensboro _ . 

4.82 

4. 81 

.66 

.66 



W inston-Salem _ 

6.91 

6. 49 

.54 

.54 



Oklahoma: Tulsa _ 

9.92 

9.61 

.84 

.84 



South Carolina: Charleston... 

8.39 

8.32 

.95 

.45 

.50 


Tennessee: 







Knoxville __ 

9.54 

9. 51 

.41 

.41 



Memphis __ 

7. 67 

7.53 

.34 

.34 



Nashville_ .. 

9.14 

9.10 

.36 

.36 



Texas: 







Dallas ___ 

6.66 

6. 52 

.46 

.46 



El Paso _ 

7. 72 

7. 69 

.42 

.42 



Fort Worth.. . 

14. 58 

14. 55 

1.90 

1.90 



Houston_ 

6. 77 

6.73 

1.79 

1.79 



San Antonio_ 

8. 79 

8.73 

.72 

.72 



Virginia: 







Norfolk__ 

8.50 

8.42 

.62 

.62 

(11) 


Richmond _ 

9. 75 

9. 34 

2.09 

2.09 

(») 


Roanoke _ 

8.04 

8.04 

.55 

.55 


West Virginia: Huntington... 

23.19 

23.15 

2.02 

2.02 



Mountain and Pacific 







California: 







Los .\ngeles _ 

24. 77 

24.66 

5.46 

6.46 

.01 


Oakland _ 

25.04 

24. 96 

3.85 

3.84 

.01 


Sacramento __-_ 

15.07 

14.95 

2.31 

2.31 

(”) 


San Diego. __ 

29. 49 

29. 45 

4.56 

4. 55 

(”) 


.9nTi Eraneisen 

28. 97 

28.60 

5.00 

5. 00 

(") 


Oolorafio! Denver 

24.36 

24. 27 

3. 40 

3.40 


Oregon: Portland _ 

21.69 

21.62 

2.74 

2.74 

(“) 


TTt.flh- Salt. T.aka City 

16. 22 

15.67 

2.47 

2.46 

.01 


Washington: 







Seattle . _ 

19. 55 

19. 42 

2.82 

2.80 

.02 


Tacoma 

26.34 

26.34 

2.83 

2. 82 

.01 



Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 


Civil 


Special t 3 rpes of public assistance' 


Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA « 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

children 

Aid to 
the blind 

lunas * 

$20. 89 

$2.38 

$1.82 

$0.51 

$0.05 

$0. 49 

20 . 21 

1.97 

1.74 

.19 

.04 

.12 

10.29 

3.20 

2 . 81 

.27 

.12 

CO 

20.27 

3.30 

2.72 

.49 

.09 

.38 

23.95 

1.98 

1.42 

.51 

.05 

.37 

17.77 

3.83 

3. 27 

.44 

.12 

.05 

17.42 

3. 34 

2.91 

.32 

.11 

.05 

14. 22 

3.86 

3.57 

.22 

.07 

.09 

26. 44 

3.04 

2. 67 

.27 

.10 

.02 

20.50 

1.99 

1.68 

.22 

.09 

.01 

' 29.95 

3.37 

1.79 

1.32 

.26 

.08 

12.19 

3.52 

2.68 

.70 

.14 

,03 

23. 44 

2.50 

1.24 

1.15 

.11 

.17 

12.88 

3.26 

2.11 

1.03 

.12 

.16 

13.31 

.86 

.37 

.49 


CO 

10. 44 

.71 

.30 

.41 


.02 

7. 55 

1.38 

.96 

.42 


.51 

7.92 

1.39 

.25 

1.12 

.02 

.27 

9. 82 

.40 

.11 

.28 

.01 

.06 

3. 79 

.37 

.08 

.29 


.21 

13.64 





. IS 

3. 51 

.35 

.05 

.29 

».01 

11.29 

23.02 

.88 

.37 

.51 


.23 

1.31 

.38 

.19 

.19 


.04 

18 7.34 

2. 43 

.99 

1.34 

.10 

.35 

6 . 41 

.03 


.02 

.01 


4.74 

.03 


.02 

.01 

.20 

4.12 

.03 


.02 

.01 

.01 

6 .93 

.02 


.02 

(») 

.42 

7.83 

.94 

.61 

.32 

.01 

.31 

7.37 





.07 

8.90 

.20 


.20 


.03 

7.07 

.12 


.12 


. 14 

8 . 74 





.04 

4.80 

1.26 

1 . 21 

.05 


.14 

6 . 79 

.48 

.48 



.03 

11 . 62 

1.03 

1.03 



.03 

4. 33 

.61 

.57 

.04 


.04 

7.15 

.86 

.86 



.06 

7.78 

.02 


.02 


.08 

7.19 

.06 


.06 


.41 

7. 48 

.01 


.01 



21.05 

.08 

.08 



.04 

16.22 

2.98 

2.23 

.36 

.39 

.11 

17. 65 

3.46 

2.37 

.76 

.33 

.08 

9.45 

3.19 

2.19 

.75 

.25 

.12 

21.00 

3.90 

3. 41 

.33 

.16 

.04 

20. 51 

3.09 

2.20 

.70 

.19 

.37 

14. 97 

5.90 

5. 08 

.68 

.14 

.09 

16. 28 

2.60 

2.32 

.24 

.04 

.07 

11.18 

2.02 

1.13 

.85 

.04 

.55 

13.75 

2.85 

2.27 

.43 

.15 

.13 

19.49 

4.02 

2.90 

.91 

21 



Private 


I Based on total population of areas estimated from U. S. censuses of 1930 
and 1940. 

> See app. A for the territory and total population included in each urban 
area. Amounts per inhabitant based on figures which relate to territory 
other than that shown in app. A are footnoted. 

3 Excludes cost of administration; of materials, equipment, and other 
items incident to opseration of work programs; and of transient care. 

* Includes statutory aid to veterans administered on basis of need. 

* Terminated in 1934. 

* Figures from the WPA, Division of Statistics; represent earnings of per¬ 
sons employed on projects operated by the WPA within these areas; figures 


are not available for earnings of persons employed on projects other than those 
operated by the WPA. 

' Includes figures for areas in States with pjlans approved by the Social Se¬ 
curity Board and for areas in States not participating under the Social Secu¬ 
rity Act. 

s Includes direct and work relief and aid to veterans. 

* Based on number of areas reporting expenditures for specified type of aid. 

Relates to county. 

” Less than 1 cent. 

13 Relates to city. 

13 Relates to Baltimore County as well as the city of Baltimore. 


147 










































































































































































Table C-30 .—Amount per inhabitant * of public and private assistance and earnings under specified Federal work 

programs, by urban area, 1937 


Public funds 


Geographic division, State, 
and urban area * 

Total 
public 
and 
private 
funds ’ 

( 

Total 

General relief ‘ 

Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 

Special types of public assistance' 

Private 
funds * 

Total 

Direct 

relief 

Work 

relief 

Civil 
Works 
Pro¬ 
gram 5 

Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA « 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

children 

Aid to 
the blind 

Median •__ 

$18.47 

$18.41 

$3. 37 

$3.30 

$0.03 


$10. 29 

$2. 99 

$2.13 

$0.66 

$0.07 

$0.13 

New England 













Connecticut: 













Bridgeport... 

12. 78 

12.54 

2.54 

2.03 

.51 


10 7.41 

2.59 

2.06 

.52 

.01 

.24 

Hartford_ . 

16.11 

15.02 

3. 61 

3.60 

.01 


8.00 

3.41 

2.81 

.58 

.02 

1.09 

New Britain_ 

13. 57 

13.49 

2. 28 

2.08 

.20 


8. 93 

2.28 

1. 75 

.52 

.01 

.08 

New Haven _ .... 

14.81 

14. 35 

3. 27 

3. 27 



10 7. 51 

3. 57 

2.94 

.61 

.02 

.46 

Maine: Portland.. 

10.48 

10. 25 

4.12 

4.12 



10 5. 19 

.94 

.36 

.37 

.21 

.23 

Massachusetts: 













Boston... 

38. 22 

36. 92 

7. 97 

7. 97 

(“) 


22. 66 

6.29 

4. 38 

1.83 

.08 

1.30 

Brockton _ 

33. 27 

32. 66 

6.72 

6. 72 


17. 01 

8.93 

7. 86 

.99 

.08 

.61 

Cambridge__ 

22. 32 

21.92 

6. 01 

6.01 



11.66 

4.25 

2. 89 

1.27 

.09 

.40 

Fall River_ 

25. 82 

25.81 

5. 35 

5. 35 



14.86 

5.60 

4.67 

.86 

.07 

.01 

Lawrence_ 

18. 95 

18. 76 

3.96 

3.96 



10.23 

4. 57 

3.85 

.69 

. 03 

. 19 

Lowell_ . . 

31.13 

30.81 

7.80 

7.80 



16. 50 

6.51 

5.15 

1. 26 

. 10 

.32 

Lynn____ 

27. 25 

26.84 

4.45 

4.45 



14. 62 

7. 77 

6. 91 

.83 

. 03 

.41 

Malden__ 

21.44 

21.43 

7.03 

7.03 



9. 89 

4. 51 

3. 84 

. 61 

.06 

.01 

New Bedford_ 

23. 36 

23.21 

5.40 

5.40 



10.64 

7.17 

6.43 

.67 

07 

.15 

Newton__ 

13. 34 

12. 97 

5.40 

5.40 



4.39 

3. 18 

2.12 

1. 05 

.01 

.37 

Springfield___ 

24.60 

24.23 

6. 95 

6.95 



12. 70 

4. 58 

3.81 

.74 

.03 

.37 

Worcester..... 

20.85 

20. 59 

7. 58 

7.58 



8. 69 

4. 32 

3. 31 

.96 


.26 

Rhode Island: Providence_ 

17.77 

17.48 

5.00 

2.39 

2.61 


1010. 05 

2.43 

1.70 

.73 


.29 

Middle Atlantic 













New Jersey: 













Jersey City... 

23.50 

23.45 

5.12 

5.12 



10 16. 80 

1. 53 

.75 

.75 

.03 

. 05 

Newark___ 

26.83 

26.72 

9.99 

9.99 



10 13. 97 

2. 76 

1.12 

1.60 

.04 

.11 

Trenton___ 

23. 22 

23.00 

5.15 

5.15 



10 15. 74 

2.11 

1.20 

.85 

.06 

.22 

New York: 












Albany_ 

13.45 

13. 25 

2.62 

2. 62 

(») 


10 9. 43 

1.20 

.87 

. 27 

06 

.20 

Buffalo..... 

24. 04 

23. 75 

8.60 

8.60 


13. 23 

1.92 

1.18 

. 70 

.04 

.29 

New Rochelle. 

20. 06 

20.04 

11.51 

11.50 

.01 


5.99 

2. 54 

1.66 

. 86 

.02 

.02 

New York_ 

36. 89 

36. 56 

12. 27 

12. 27 



21. 08 

3. 21 

1.84 

1. 34 

03 

.33 

Niagara Falls.. 

11.20 

11.06 

4.49 

4. 49 

(") 


10 5. 09 

1.48 

. 77 

. 71 

(11) 

. 14 

Rochester__ 

24. 26 

24.13 

9.08 

9.07 

' .01 


10 11. 26 

3. 79 

2. 80 

.93 

06 

.13 

Syracuse_ 

24. 81 

24. 60 

8. 44 

8. 42 

.02 


10 13. 68 

2. 48 

2.14 

. 30 

04 

.21 

Utica__ 

16.30 

15. 98 

6.05 

6.03 

.02 


10 6. 27 

3. 66 

2. 36 

1 27 

03 

. 32 

Yonkers.. 

25. 81 

25.54 

5.81 

5.78 

.03 


17.07 

2. 66 

1. 62 

1.02 

.02 

. 27 

Pennsylvania: 













Allentown_ 

18.97 

18.91 

3.68 

, 3.68 



12. 35 

2.88 

2. 00 

. 54 

.34 

,06 

Altoona_____ 

21.10 

20.98 

3. 69 

3.69 



13. 40 

3.89 

2. 74 

. 71 

. 44 

. 12 

Bethlehem___ 

19.71 

19.64 

3. 59 

3. 59 



13.31 

2. 74 

1. 88 

. 57 

. 29 

.07 

Che.ster... __ 

12. 59 

12.50 

1.78 

1.78 



8. 55 

2.17 

1. 50 

.42 

. 25 

. 09 

Erie _ 

23.61 

23.61 

4.00 

4.00 



15.09 

4. 52 

3 29 

75 

48 


Johnstown__ 

19. 28 

19.25 

4. 75 

4. 75 



11.19 

3. 31 

2. 29 

.70 

32 

. 03 

Philadelphia___ 

27.41 

27.10 

12. 31 

12. 31 



11. 62 

3. 17 

2 21 

.59 

37 

31 

Pittsburgh_ . 

27.83 

27. 63 

7.06 

7.06 



17. 40 

3.17 

2 13 

76 

98 

?0 

Reading_ 

16. 95 

16. 84 

3. 37 

3.37 



10. 02 

3. 45 

2. 48 

. .56 

41 

11 

Scranton.___ 

37. 34 

37.16 

9.60 

9. 60 



24.46 

3.10 

1.97 

. 82 

31 

1ft 

Wilkes-Barre_ 

38.13 

38.09 

10.40 

10.40 



24. 93 

2. 76 

1. 66 

.79 

.31 

.04 

North Central 










Illinois: 













Chicago ___ 

23. 48 

23.20 

7. 59 

7. 59 



n 12.97 

2. 64 

2. 25 

23 

16 

9g 

Springfield_ 

16. 55 

16.32 

5.35 

5. 35 



7. 49 

3. 48 

2 93 

. 17 

!38 

.23 

Indiana: 










Evansville__ 

20. 44 

20. 38 

2.06 

2.06 



15. 38 

2. 94 

1. 88 

.99 

07 

06 

Fort Wayne_ 

13.10 

12.89 

.76 

. 76 



9. 80 

2. 33 

1, 45 

80 

08 

.-21 

Indianapolis... 

21. 33 

21.08 

3.47 

3. 47 



14. 37 

3. 24 

2 22 

8Q 

13 

.-25 

South Bend__ 

16. 72 

16. 66 

1.80 

1.80 



12. 78 

2. 08 

1 36 

68 

04 

06 

Terre Haute... 

30. 84 

30.71 

2. 21 

2. 21 



24. 76 


2. 90 

.69 

.15 

.13 

Iowa: 










Des Moines... 

23.17 

23.10 

5. 65 

5.62 

.03 


14.16 

3. 29 

2 9.5 

26 

08 

07 

Sioux City_ 

19.68 

19. 56 

6. 82 

6.82 



10. 60 

2.14 

1.70 

.38 

.06 

.12 

Kansas: 









Kansas City___ 

19.63 

19.63 

2. 50 

2.50 



16. 92 

.21 

. 17 

04 

(i‘) 

(’o'l 

Topeka___ 

13.84 

13.74 

3.64 

3j64 



9. 68 

.42 

. 21 

. 20 

01 

-10 

Wichita... 

13. 37 

13.28 

3.83 

3.83 



9.13 

. 39 

.26 

.05 

.01 

.09 

Michigan: 









Detroit___ 

12.09 

12.00 

3.29 

3. 29 



5.89 

2 82 

98 

1 82 


09 

Flint... 

11.45 

11.44 

3.79 

3. 79 



5.00 

2 6.5 

1 84 

80 

01 

01 

Grand Rapids... 

18.10 

18. 05 

2.97 

2. 97 



11.09 

3.99 

2 57 

1 .36 

06 

05 

Pontiac..."_ 

8.08 

8.07 

2.08 

2.08 



3. 41 

2. 58 

1 57 

QQ 

02 

01 

Saginaw__ 

8.69 

8. 59 

2.16 

2.16 



3. 75 

2.68 

1.62 

1.04 

.02 

.10 

Minnesota: 








Duluth___ 

31.94 

31.66 

5.60 

5.60 



19.49 

6.57 

5 3ft 

1 14 

05 

OQ 

Minneapolis__ 

30.61 

30.21 

9. 38 

9.38 



14. 69 

6 14 

.5 36 

74 

04 


St. Paul.__ 

33.07 

32. 83 

10.05 

10.05 



18. 31 

4.47 

3. 92 

. 50 

.05 

.24 

Missouri: 








Kansas City___ 

14.43 

14.07 

u 1.63 

» 1.63 



10. 07 

2 37 

2 m 

og 

29 


St. Louis..-.. 

15.47 

15.14 

2.31 

2.31 



11.45 

1.38 

1.07 

. 10 

.21 

.33 


See footnotes at end of table. 


148 




























































































































































Table 0-30.—Amount per inhabitant ^ of public and private assistance and earnings under specified Federal work 

programs, by urban area, 1937 —Continued 


1 


Geographic division, State, 
and urban area > 


Total 
public 
and 
private 
funds 2 

North Central—C on. 


.'Nebraska: Omaha_ 

$24. 21 

bhio: 


Akron...- 

20. 52 

Canton___ 

11.89 

Cincinnati--.. 

20. 48 

Cleveland___ 

25. 85 

Columbus.... 

20.00 

Dayton.... .. 

19.05 

Springfield_ 

16. 05 

Toledo.... 

24.05 

Youngstown_ 

18.83 

Wisconsin: 


Kenosha__ .. 

31.79 

Madison___ 

17.99 

Milwaukee_ 

25. 53 

Racine.... 

16. 96 

South Atlantic and 


South Central 


Alabama: 


Birmingham..... 

9.94 

Mobile__ 

8.88 

Delaware: Wilmington.. . 

9. 49 

District of Columbia: Wash- 

10.90 

ington. 


Florida: 


Jacksonville..- 

10. 55 

Miami__— 

4.42 

Georgia: Atlanta_ 

11.47 

Kentucky: Louisville_ 

6 . 24 

Louisiana: 


' New Orleans_ 

21.56 

1 Shreveport... 

1.68 

1 Maryland: Baltimore. 

10.43 

1 North Carolina: 


Asheville__ 

6.41 

Charlotte___ 

3. 53 

1 Greensboro__ 

4.12 

Winston-Salem__ 

6.14 

Oklahoma: Tulsa_ 

10. 38 

South Carolina: Charleston... 

7. 57 

Termessee: 


Knoxville.. 

5. 87 

Memphis___ 

5. 51 

Nashville__ 

5.82 

Texas: 


Dallas__ 

8 . 33 

' El Paso___ 

5.16 

Fort Worth..... 

13. 33 

1 Houston__- 

5.81 

San Antonio_ 

6.65 

Virginia: 


Norfolk___ 

5. 68 

Richmond__ 

6 .93 

Roanoke__ 

4.92 

W'est Virginia: Huntington... 

18.04 

Mountain and Pacific 


California: 


Los Angeles... 

22 . 66 

Oakland-- .. 

25. 77 

Sacramento_ 

14. 73 

San Diego_- 

29. 25 

San Francisco.. 

28. 58 

Colorado: Denver_ 

23.70 

Oregon: Portland_ 

18. 87 

nt.Ah: Rfilt Tiakft Olty -- -- 

16. 64 

Washington: 


... . _ 

21.64 

Tanoma . ___ 

28. 95 




Public funds 


Total 

General relief * 

Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 

Special types of public assistance i 

Private 
funds • 

Total 

Direct 

relief 

Work 

relief 

Civil 
Works 
Pro¬ 
gram 5 

Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA « 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

children 

Aid to 
the blind 

$23.75 

$0.62 

$0.62 



$18. 57 

$4.56 

$3.31 

$1.17 

$0.08 

$0.46 

20.41 

2. 40 

2. 32 

$0.08 


15. 24 

2. 77 

2.32 

.41 

.04 

. 11 

11.88 

2.09 

2.08 

.01 


5.67 

4.12 

3. 53 

.48 

.11 

.01 

20. 09 

4.01 

3.88 

.13 


11.97 

4.11 

3.31 

.70 

.10 

.39 

25.46 

6.31 

6.11 

.20 


16. 74 

2.41 

1.70 

.65 

.06 

.39 

19.93 

3. 04 

3.01 

.03 


11.97 

4. 92 

4. 30 

.48 

.14 

.07 

19.01 

2.85 

2.82 

.03 


11. 46 

4.70 

4.04 

.65 

.11 

.04 

16.00 

1. 79 

1.79 



8.13 

6.08 

5. 36 

.67 

.15 

.05 

24. 03 

3.82 

3.70 

.12 


16.35 

3.86 

3. 43 

.30 

.13 

.02 

18.82 

2.54 

2.54 



13. 14 

3.14 

2.30 

.66 

.09 

.01 

31 72 

5.38 

5.38 



21.00 

5. 34 

3.11 

1.98 

.25 

.07 

17.95 

2.91 

2.88 

.03 


10. 35 

4.69 

3. 59 

.99 

.11 

.04 

25. 33 

4.94 

4.94 



16.96 

3.43 

2.01 

1.30 

.12 

.20 

16. 81 

3.02 

3.02 



9.43 

4.36 

2.87 

1.38 

.11 

.15 

9 94 

.17 

' .17 



8.60 

L17 

.68 

.68 

.01 

(») 

8 84 

.07 

.07 



7.79 

.98 

.68 

.29 

.01 

.04 

14 

1 66 

1 60 



6. 67 

1.81 

1.25 

.56 


.35 

10. 63 

1.57 

1. 57 



6.70 

2.36 

1.18 

1.11 

.07 

.27 

10 48 

.35 

.35 



8.85 

1.28 

1.00 

.27 

.01 

.07 

4 

30 

30 



2. 61 

1.27 

.96 

.31 


.24 

IL 33 

.95 

.95 



9.89 

.49 

.34 

.14 

.01 

. 14 


la 69 

13 62 



4.29 

.92 

.65 

.27 


n .41 

21. 33 

1.17 

1.17 



18.05 

2.11 

.89 

1.20 

.02 

.23 

1 65 

. 45 

45 



.23 

.97 

.52 

.44 

.01 

.03 

in. 11 

1.99 

1.99 



13 4. 52 

3.60 

1.91 

1.57 

.12 

.32 

6 


, 62 



5.52 

.37 

.26 

.08 

.03 


3 39 

^22 

!22 



2.98 

.19 

.11 

.06 

.02 

.14 

4 11 

.57 

. 57 



2.97 

.67 

.39 

.13 

.05 

.01 

5 57 

.66 

.66 



4. 64 

.27 

.17 

.07 

.03 

.57 

10 03 

.27 

.27 



5.40 

4. 36 

3.51 

.70 

.15 

.35 

7 flO 

. 16 

. 16 



6. 99 

.35 

.26 

.08 

.01 

.07 

5 85 

.53 

.53 



4.88 

.44 

.12 

.31 

.01 

.02 

5. 35 

.25 

.25 



4. 68 

.42 

.17 

.23 

.02 

. 16 

5 78 

.66 




4.92 

.30 

.13 

.16 

.01 

.04 

g IQ 

46 

46 



4.69 

3.04 

2.99 

.05 


.14 

5 13 

Loi 

i-Ql 



3.94 

1.18 

1.18 



.03 

on 

71^ 

70 

.01 


9.16 

3.43 

3.43 



.03 

6 76 

.55 

.55 


3.31 

1.90 

1.86 

.04 


.05 

6 54 



4.35 

2.19 

2.19 



. 11 

5 60 

58 

58 



5.00 

.02 


.02 


.08 

6 52 


j, 6S 



4. 78 

.06 


.06 


.41 






4 S9 

.02 


.02 



17 04 

.81 

.81 



16.16 

1.97 

1.49 

.41 

.07 

.10 

54 

4 99 

4.99 



12.03 

6.52 

4.60 

.46 

.46 

.12 


4 92 

4.92 



15.68 

5.09 

3.88 

.83 

.38 

.08 

14 ^^2 

3 30 

3.30 



5.15 

6.17 

4.92 

.90 

. 35 

. 11 

90 

4 73 

4. 73 



17. 45 

7. 02 

6.26 

.53 

.23 

. 05 

2g 18 

5 98 

5.98 



17.45 

4. 75 

3.82 

.66 

.28 

.40 

23 61 

3. 20 

3 20 



9. 40 

11.01 

9. 67 

1. 21 

. 13 

.09 

2g gi 

3 IS 

3 18 



11.56 

4.07 

3. 67 

.26 

.14 

.06 

15 

3. 21 

3. 21 



8.75 

3.85 

2.83 

.95 

.07 

.83 

21 47 

4 7? 

4. 72 



11.47 

5.28 

4.23 

.89 

. 16 

. 17 

28.95 

4.49 

4. 49 



17. 73 

6. 73 

5.00 

1.61 

.22 



1 Based on total population of areas estimated from U. S. censuses of 1930 
1940 

2 See app. A for the territory and total population included in each urban 

area. Amounts per inhabitant based on figures which relate to territory 
other than that shown in app. A are footnoted. . j 

* Excludes cost of administration; of materials, eqmpment, and other items 
incident to operation of work programs; and of transient care. 

* Includes statutory aid to veterans administered on basis of neea. 

‘ Terminated in 1934. .... *. 

» Figures from the WPA, Division of Statistics; represent earnings oi 
persons employed on projects operated by the WPA within these areas, 


figures are not available for earnings of persons employed on projects other 

than those operated by the WPA. j x, .i. o ■ ■ 

2 Includes figures for areas in States with plans approved by the Social 
Security Board and for areas in States not participating under the Social 
Security Act. , _ 

s Includes direct and work relief and aid to veterans. 

• Based on number of areas reporting expenditures for specified type of aid. 

Relates to county, 
n Less than 1 cent. 

12 Relates to city. , . , „ ,x. 

12 Relates to Baltimore County as well as the city of Baltimore. 


149 






























































































































































Table C—SI.—Amount per inhabitant * of public and private assistance and earnings under specified Federal u'orJc 

programs, by urban area, 1938 


Public funds 


Geographic division, State, 
and in-ban area > 


Total 

public 

and 



privaitJ 

funds 8 

Total 

Total 

Direct 
relief ® 

Work 
relief' 

Civil 
Works 
Pro¬ 
gram » 

Median __ 

$26. 03 

$25.98 

$4.03 








New England 







Connecticut: 

Bridgeport. 

19. 75 

19. 51 

4.60 




Hartford.... 

22. 48 

21.30 

4.49 




New Britain__ 

20. 32 

20.26 

3. 38 




New Haven.. 

22. 76 

22.39 

4. 93 




Maine: Portland.. 

15.90 

16.65 

4.44 




Massachusetts: 

Boston.. 

44.06 

42. 82 

7.75 




Brockton__ 

46.22 

45.44 

6 99 




Cambridge_ 

31.52 

31.14 

7.85 




Fall River_ 

36.30 

36.29 

5.83 




Lawrence... 

30. 33 

30.13 

6.21 




Lowell.... 

47.26 

46.98 

9.38 




Lynn... 

37. 37 

36.99 

5.58 




Malden... 

28. 67 

28.66 

8 . 50 




New Bedford___ 

34. 62 

34. 45 

7.62 




Newton...... 

17. 49 

17.13 

5. 83 




Springfield_ 

31.51 

31.15 

9. 41 




Worcester_ 

29.76 

29. 49 

11.82 




Rhode Island: Providence_ 

25.85 

25.56 

6.91 




Middle Atlantic 




New Jersey: 

Jersey City_ 

25.20 

25.17 

7.90 




Newark.... 

33.90 

33.80 

13.74 




Trenton_ 

27.71 

27.48 

7.54 




New York: 

Albany..... 

15.26 

15.04 

3.75 




Buffalo_ 

25.64 

25. 39 

12. 77 




New Rochelle_ 

22.41 

22.38 

13.56 




New York_ 

36. 70 

36. 39 

11.79 




Niagara Falls_ 

15.08 

14. 97 

8 . 45 




Rochester_ 

27.85 

27. 71 

13.23 




Syracuse_ 

26. 44 

26. 20 

12 . 21 




Utica__ 

19. 46 

19.15 

7.60 




Yonkers__ 

28.42 

28.24 

8.88 




Pennsylvania: 

Allentown___ 

23.44 

23. 38 

3.31 




Altoona..__ 

32.82 

32.81 

6.81 




Bethlehem__ 

24. 61 

24.54 

3. 37 




Chester_ 

13.91 

13.84 

2.36 




Erie_ 

29. 74 

29.74 

4.99 




Johnstown_ 

29. 47 

29. 45 

6.18 




Philadelphia.. 

28.25 

27.96 

15.06 




Pittsburgh_ 

35.00 

34.79 

10.44 




Reading___ 

22. 93 

22. 87 

4.38 




Scranton__ 

48. 59 

48. 45 

6.29 




Wilkes-Barre_ 

45.14 

45.09 

8 . 24 




North Central 






Illinois: 

Chicago_ 

33. 46 

33.18 

8.23 




Springfield.... 

23.79 

23. 51 

5.81 




Indiana: 

Evansville_ 

34. 44 

34. 38 

3.25 




Fort Wayne__ 

21.92 

21.75 

1.56 




Indianapolis_ 

30. 33 

30.11 

3.64 




South Bend..__ 

27.89 

27.84 

3.78 




Terre Haute_... 

47.81 

47.72 

2.22 




Iowa: 

Des Moines___ 

34. 74 

34.67 

3.71 




Sioux City_ 

25.45 

25.33 

6.81 




Kansas: 

Kansas City__ 

27.18 

27.17 

2.50 




Topeka__ 

17. 96 

17.89 

1. 72 




Wichita___ ... 

17. 99 

17.91 

3.31 




Michigan: 

Detroit... 

35.25 

35.16 

7.59 




Flint-... 

36. 89 

36. 87 

8.58 




Grand Rapids__ 

34. 93 

34.85 

3.12 




Pontiac_ 

26.15 

26.14 

5.89 




Saginaw__ 

23. 25 

23.17 

3. 75 




Minnesota: 

Duluth___ 

45.00 

44. 71 

7.71 




Minneapolis_ 

37.80 

37.58 

9. 39 




St. Paul_ 

39.14 

38.91 

9. 22 




Missouri: 

Kansas City.. 

23.20 

22.83 

u 2.03 




St. Louis___ 

24. 69 

24.32 

1.60 





General relief < 


Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 


Special types of public assistance * 


See footnotes at end of table. 


Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA 1 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

children 

Aid to 
the blind 


$16.15 

$3.59 

$2.46 

$0.84 

$0.10 

$0.13 

11 12. 32 

2.69 

2.14 

.64 

.01 

.24 

13. 02 

3.79 

3.21 

.55 

.03 

1.18 

14. 52 

2. 36 

1.84 

.51 

.01 

.06 

11 13. 54 

3.92 

3.28 

.61 

.03 

.37 

11 8. 31 

2.90 

2.19 

.48 

.23 

.26 

26. 90 

8.17 

6.42 

2.65 

.10 

1.24 

27. 33 

11.12 

9.66 

1.36 

.10 

.78 

17. 79 

5.50 

3.66 

1.75 

.09 

.38 

23.91 

6. 65 

6.24 

1.23 

.08 

.01 

17. 76 

6.16 

5. 35 

.74 

.07 

.20 

29. 02 

8.58 

6.98 

1.60 

.10 

.28 

22.20 

9. 21 

8.07 

1.08 

.06 

.38 

13.70 

6. 46 

5. 57 

.83 

.06 

.01 

18. 40 

8. 43 

7. 39 

.96 

.08 

.17 

7. 38 

3. 92 

2. 56 

1.34 

.02 

.36 

15. 36 

6. 39 

5.20 

1.15 

.04 

.36 

11.97 

5.70 

4.47 

1.18 

.05 

.27 

11 16. 37 

3.28 

2.44 

.84 


.29 

11 15. 52 

1.75 

.90 

.81 

.04 

.03 

11 16. 97 

3.09 

1.35 

1.69 

.05 

.10 

11 17. 35 

2.59 

1.43 

1.10 

.06 

.23 

11 9. 76 

1.53 

1.15 

.32 

.06 

.22 

10.19 

2. 43 

1.46 

.91 

.06 

.25 

5.23 

3.59 

2.11 

1.45 

.03 

.03 

20. 74 

3.86 

2.12 

1.68 

.06 

.31 

11 4. 65 

1.87 

.94 

.92 

.01 

.11 

11 9. 45 

5.03 

3. 57 

1.38 

.08 

.14 

11 10. 70 

3.29 

2. 72 

.52 

.05 

.24 

11 7. 32 

4.33 

2.84 

1.46 

.03 

.31 

16.01 

3.35 

1.85 

1. 47 

.03 

.18 

17.11 

2.96 

1.98 

.62 

.36 

.06 

21.59 

4. 41 

3.00 

.91 

.50 

.01 

18.16 

3.01 

1.96 

.71 

.34 

.07 

9. 39 

2. 09 

1.39 

.43 

.27 

.07 

19.99 

4. 76 

3.38 

.89 

.49 

(!S) 

19. 55 

3. 72 

2. 35 

1.00 

.37 

.02 

9.68 

3.22 

2. 21 

.60 

.41 

.29 

21.02 

3. 33 

2.16 

.86 

.31 

.21 

15.23 

3.26 

2.28 

.53 

.45 

.06 

38. 58 

3. 58 

2. 19 

1.04 

.35 

.14 

33.76 

3. 09 

1.73 

1.01 

.35 

.05 

11 21.81 

3.14 

2. 70 

.23 

.21 

.28 

13.89 

3.81 

3.21 

.18 

.42 

.28 

27.16 

3.97 

2. 21 

1.63 

.13 

.06 

16. 75 

3. 44 

1.92 

1.42 

.10 

.17 

22. 24 

4.23 

2. 46 

1.61 

.16 

.22 

21.19 

2.87 

1.67 

1.14 

.06 

.05 

40.10 

5.40 

3. 71 

1.49 

.20 

.09 

25.64 

5. 32 

4. 85 

.23 

.24 

.07 

14. 40 

4.12 

3.53 

.45 

.14 

.12 

22.02 

2.65 

1.80 

. 74 

.11 

.01 

13.05 

3.12 

1.97 

1.02 

.13 

.07' 

11.09 

3. 51 

2. 39 

1.00 

.12 

.08 

23.94 

3. 63 

1.56 

2.04 

.03 

.09 

24. 38 

3.91 

2. 83 

1.06 

.02 

.02 

25.29 

6. 44 

4.70 

1.67 

.07 

.08 

16.72 

3.53 

2. 36 

1. 16 

.01 

.01 

15.41 

4. 01 

2. 77 

1.22 

.02 

.08 

29.39 

7.61 

6.09 

1.42 

.10 

.29 

21.50 

6. 69 

5.84 

.78 

.07 

.22 

24.78 

4. 91 

4. 22 

.61 

.08 

.23 

16.92 

3.88 

3.44 

.16 

.28 

i».37 

20.13 

2. 59 

2. 05 

.34 

.20 

.27 


Private 
funds * 


150 





























































































































































I 


ll Table C-31 .—Amount per inhabitant ‘ of public and private assistance and earnings under specified Federal work 

programs, by urban area, 1938 —Continued 


Geographic division. State, 
and urban area * 

Total 
public 
and 
private 
funds 3 

Public funds 

Private 
funds • 

Total 

General relief * 

Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 

Special types of public assistance * 

Total 

Direct 
relief * 

Work 
relief « 

Civil 
Works 
Pro¬ 
gram « 

Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA ? 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

children 

Aid to 
the blind 

North Central— Con. 













Nebraska: Omaha_ 

Ohio: 

$33.36 

$32. 88 

$0. 35 




$27.67 

$4.86 

$3.53 

$1.23 

$ 0.10 

$0.48 

Akron... 

43.41 

43. 32 

2.41 




4fi 

3 45 

2 63 

76 


.09 

Canton_ ___ 

29. 08 

29. 07 

3. 73 




20 77 

4 57 

3 88 



Cincinnati--.- 

27. 56 

27.23 

5. 32 




17 FiQ 

4 32 

3 48 



. 01 

Cleveland__ 

49. 16 

48. 78 

5.14 




40 Oft 

9 06 

1 96 



. 33 

Columbus_ - 

29. 27 

29.20 

3.45 




20 

5 30 

4 56 

AQ 


. 38 

Dayton-__ 

29.17 

29.13 

4. 54 




10 fifi 

4 03 

4 ^9 

64 


. 07 

Springfield_ 

27.29 

27.29 

4.34 




15. 33 

7 ! 62 

fi 63 

7R 

21 

. 04 

Toledo.-. 

53. 15 

53.13 

6 . 13 




42 25 

4 7.»1 

3' gg 

73 



Youngstown.. 

33. 60 

33. 58 

3.28 




26.80 

3 ! 50 

2 ! 62 

.74 

.14 

. U2 
.02 

Wisconsin: 







Kenosha---__ 

50. 22 

50.16 

7.11 




36 48 

fi .*>7 

3 60 

2 71 



Madison__ 

24. 57 

24. 54 

2.33 




If 82 

Ft ftO 

3 g 9 

1 47 



Milwaukee.. 

36.61 

36.39 

6.38 




25 95 

4 OR 

2 45 

1 48 



Racine__ --- 

28.03 

27.89 

5.04 




17 77 

si 08 

3.02 

1.97 

.09 

.14 

South Atlantic and 








South Central 













Alabama: 













Birmingham_ 

15.19 

15.19 

.18 




13 73 

1 9S 

, 61 

65 

02 


Mobile_ 

12. 33 

12.29 

.09 




11 21 

QQ 

78 

19 

.02 


Delaware: Wilmington_ 

13. 25 

12. 93 

2.30 




8.83 

L 80 

1.11 

.69 

.32 

District of Columbia: Wash- 









ington..-__ 

14. 53 

14.22 

.98 




10. 56 

2.68 

1.52 

1.06 

.10 

.31 

Florida: 







Jacksonville_ 

19.68 

19. 62 

.39 




16. 29 

9 . 04 

9 04 

, 27 

13 


Miami__-_ 

7. 08 

6.86 

.28 




4 30 

9 2ft 

1 R7 

^ 34 

07 


Georgia: Atlanta_- - -- 

19. 29 

19.16 

.73 




16. 96 

1 47 

91 

‘ 61 

.05 


Kentucky: Louisville_ 

11.11 

10.80 

» .77 




9.03 

1.00 

!76 

.24 

H.31 

Louisiana: 











New Orleans_ 

26. 77 

26. 53 

1.10 




22. 61 

9 ft2 

1 1R 

1 67 

07 

24 

Shreveport_ --- 

2. 76 

2. 73 

.54 




. 72 

1 47 

77 

fift 

, 02 

03 

Maryland: Baltimore_ 

11.12 

10.88 

2. 55 




3.87 

4 46 

2.28 

2.06 

.12 

.24 

North Carolina: 









Asheville __ 

14. 58 

14. 58 

.35 




12.24 

1.99 

1. 33 

Rfi 

10 


Charlotte_ - 

6. 75 

6. 70 

.46 




4.86 

1 38 

90 

39 

' 09 

65 

Greensboro_ 

6.74 

6. 74 

. 13 




4. 72 

1.89 

1 23 

! Rfi 

* 10 

fu'i 

Winston-Salem . ... 

10.02 

9. 51 

.45 




7. 47 

1 .59 

1 07 

42 

' 10 

54 

Oklahoma: Tulsa_ 

15. 44 

15.01 

.56 




8.83 

5.62 

4 34 

1 12 

' 16 

.-43 

South Carolina: Charleston--- 

16.31 

16.26 

.32 




14.17 

1. 77 

1 24 

.46 

!o7 

.05 

Tennessee: 










Knoxville__ 

10. 38 

10. 34 

.32 




7.81 

2 21 

1 11 

1 04 

06 

04 

Memphis__ 

8.18 

8.04 

.07 




5. 86 

2.11 

1 . 29 

.70 

12 

14 

Nashville_ 

8.50 

8.44 

. 15 




6. 30 

1.99 

1.08 

80 

11 

06 

Texas: 












Dallas__ 

10. 46 

10. 32 

.66 




6.90 

2 . 76 

2. 73 

.03 


14 

El Paso-_- _ 

6. 65 

6.61 

.01 




5. 57 

1.03 

1.03 



04 

Fort W^orth-.. 

16. 82 

16.80 

.91 




12. 38 

3. 51 

3.51 



^ 02 

Houston. _ 

7. 35 

7. 29 

.65 




4. 93 

1. 71 

1. 71 



OR 

San Antonio_ 

9. 62 

9. 49 





7. 26 

2.23 

2.23 



.13 

Virginia: 












Norfolk__ 

6.43 

6. 36 

.40 




5.92 

.04 

.01 

.02 

.01 

.07 

Richmond__ 

8.93 

8. 55 

1. 78 




6.59 

. 18 

. 11 

.06 

.01 

.38 

Roanoke___ 

5. 65 

5. 65 

.56 




5.02 

.07 

.03 

.03 

.01 


West Virginia: Huntington... 

25.91 

25.81 

1.44 




22.33 

2.04 

1.33 

.63 

.08 

,10 

Mountain and Pacific 












California: 













Los Angeles_ 

23.87 

23. 74 

6.35 



. 

9.35 

8.04 

6.73 

.70 

.61 

. 13 

Oakland.- _ 

33. 47 

33. 39 

6.14 




20. 54 

6.71 

6.19 

1.02 

. 50 

.08 


20. 48 

20. 36 

4. 03 




7. 70 

8.63 

6.95 

1.19 

.49 

. 12 

San Diego ___ 

29.81 

29. 77 

5.34 




14. 72 

9. 71 

8. 51 

.83 

.37 

.04 

San Francisco_ 

35. 42 

35.07 

6.69 




21.88 

6.50 

5.31 

.80 

.39 

.35 

Colorado: Denver _ 

27.81 

27.70 

2.47 




12.69 

12.54 

11.02 

1.40 

. 12 

. 11 

Orpfron* Port.lfind 

23. 79 

23.71 

3.84 




14. 21 

5.66 

4.99 

.51 

. 16 

.08 

TTtah’ Salt TjaVf* Oitv 

23. 97 

23.10 

2.28 




13. 52 

7. 30 

6.69 

1.55 

.06 

.87 

Washington: 














28.46 

28.31 

3.91 




17.64 

6. 76 

6. 62 

.93 

.21 

.16 


37.41 

37.41 

3.54 




26.10 

7.77 

6.15 

1.41 

.21 
















I Based on total population of areas estimated from U. S. censuses of 1930 
and 1940. 

> See app. A for the territory and total population included in each urban 
area. Amounts per inhabitant based on figures which relate to territory other 
than that shown in app. A are footnoted. 

3 Excludes cost of administration; of materials, equipment, and other items 
incident to operation of work programs; and of transient care. 

< Includes statutory aid to veterans administered on basis of need. 

• Figures not available. 

«Terminated in 1934. 

3 Figures from the W PA, Division of Statistics; represent earnings of 
persons employed on projects operated by the WPA within these areas; 


figures are not available for earnings of persons employed on projects other 
than those operated by the WPA. 

8 Includes figures for areas in States with plans approved by the Social 
Security Board and for areas in States not participating under the Social 
Security Act. 

“ Includes direct and work relief and aid to veterans. 

1“ Based on number of areas reporting expenditures for specified type of aid. 
» Relates to county. 

13 Less than 1 cent. 

13 Relates to city. 

13 Relates to Baltimore County as well as the city of Baltimore. 


151 












































































































































Os 

t 

0 

Os 


c 

0 

Cf. 

§ 

K 

0 

c^ 

c 

pC 

tl. 

Mr 

'C 


V5 


2 

fee 

0 

Im 

Cl, 

u 

0 

S 

0 

Im 


“2 

•iM* 

S' 

u 

o 

•0 

z 

M* 

BM 

»D 

fee 

z 

•m 

z 

L, 

0 

e 

Q 

O 

o 

C 

0 

4id 

Vi 

•m 

Vi 

Vi 

O 

o 

•w 

0 

5^ 

•M 

k. 

a, 

c 

o 


2 

a, 

z 

s 

c 

s 


c 

*£ 

C8 

H 


o«» 

>*0 

•r c 


00 

CO 

o 


r>- 

•» 

o 


o CO »o o <o ^ 

h- 00 00 <C «0 

CO 05 OJ OS »-< ‘O 

<0 iO 

^ O OS OS h» 

OS OS OS 00 00 00 


00 CO CO 1-1 <o 
CO OS CO <0 *0 CO 
r-* 00 O CO »0 

t^oo »o »o 

S CO CO ■»t‘ OS cO 
GCOOOOOOO 


CO 

CO 


CO 1 -H C^ CO OS '<f 
OS o CO CO »0 CO 
O CO CO coo 

O O CO CO oTcd 
TT" « CO OS OS 
OS OS OS 00 00 


o O 00 CO 
c 5 Ol CO t>- 00 
00 00 O CO 
^ ^ 

h- »0 00 *--1 Q 
00 OS 00 o ^ ^ 
t^CO 00 o 


05 

'O 

fl 

3 

Sx 

o 

« 

3 

P4 


8 

fl 

03 

•*<> 

05 

05 

05 

03 

o 

• •-H 

3 

a 


CO 

C5 

a 


03 

•^N 

v 

<D 

D* 

CQ 


o 

X3 

o a 
** 35 

<5 


t^ 

o» 

CO 

r>* 


t- CO lO lO CO 
CO O OI 00 OJ 

00 cfe o cooo 


^ CO o Q 

O CO CO OS »-* CO 
CO o OS •“! 


lO p OS CO 
1.^ ^ ^ Ol 


CO O CO 00 CO Q 
Ol CO CO CO •«?t‘ ^ 




cs 

OS 


CO coco o 

CO CO 00 

Ol TP O O OS 


o *'9* CO CO 00 
^ O P t''* CO *-< 
d C^ c5 CO CO 


i-H Tt« r>. Q»-«CO 
»0 CO CO P CO CO 
t>- 


S ^Tfl>-CO^- 

t-. 00 00 oo 

t'- ^-t'- 


^ a d 

O O' 

u. 

*3 d2 

•M C5 <3 

aja 

(DO 

'd 


00 

OS 

CO 

cs 

<o 

CO 

CO 


t>- Tf« CO CS 00 O 

CO 00 CO CO r-* r-< 

CO csi o CO CO 

»k •v *% ah 

C^S OS X CO ^ 

S ec rM .—I lO 05 

COXTf< cox 


O- CO O P CD 
CO O ^ 

1 —( O 05 ^ OS C5 

»0 w lO 05 P X 
CO cs X OS P »—t 
X X OS OS cs o 




r>» 

CO 

fC 

X 

CO 

CD 


OS o ■>?r X X 
O-’^CO^OC^ 
CO CO P X CO 

• 

X t>- 05 o ^ 
X X CO CO OS 
C> CO 


X CO •-' OS i-» 
05 OS 05 X P CO 
X CO P OS X 

O cOoTc^O of 

COi^XXTT't^ 
05 X X CO CO 


locococococo cocococococo 


D B 

bfiO 
cQ ca 

I J ^ 

*3 


CO 


o ^ 

CO 


X 

CO 

cc 

o 

»o 

CO 

9^ 


tD<D^O>aO'^ 
CO X 00 o 
OS P O 04 ^ 

a. a« as *. •• 

O Tf< OS CO i-« 
P X X 05 OS 
CO CO 'ij* cox 


s 


OS CO X ^ 
o CO '«»' X X 
CO CO CO t>- t-H 

tvT to CO 05 oi 00 
^ to 05 P X P 
o •-' 05 05 »0 


050505050505 XXXXXX 


05 

OS 

to 

to 

cs 

o> 


h- 


Q O X O cs 

Olt^'^COXh- 
05 (OS X X P P 


X ox X X t'- 


s w 

^ to to CO 


X05X05 0Sr^ 
OS X 05 X X 
to X rt* OS o 

tjj'co 00 cc''*-f'^ 

X 05 o CO X O 
X (OS O 05 CO 


"^^cocococo 


03 

•4-S 

o 


CO 

X 

CO 

X 

§ 


05 

05 


O X •“< CO 05 CD 
X CO 05 P CO X 
X X X X 05 X 


r--. p X X X X 
P O to X P X 
1-H 05 t'' P X P 


P P 05 

p 25 p 

X P »-< 


r^^p ph-'<«fxPP 
050X 05O-P05COr- 

PO^ P0»XO»-(05 


t^|--Xt>.XX XXXPPP 


X 


p 

p 

p 


p 

p 

05 


X ’—( t>- p P 
P P P P P 05 
1-H X X X X P 


t- 05 X 05 P 
05 X P X p 
P 05 X 05 P 


X P X 1—' p P 
t>- 05 P X P X 
O 05 05 rf' CO 


X CO P P X 
P 1-1 P (05 P <N 
X P »-( P 


p p p p p 
05 05 05 05 05 


»—i 05 
05 OI 05 05 05 


03 

l-l 

D 

03 

*-1 (_ 

D tc 
'd o 
C 

3 ^ 
(r>^4 
bofc 

n 9 

w 


tx- 

o'dp^ 
QP dP 

p 03? 


o 

p 

?3 

X 


rx. 


OI r^x P X 
I'" p h- p p p 
X p X »-( p o 

p to 05 px X 
p p (N p p p 
I-H X X l^P o 


P P P 05 
X X t>- P X 
P O- X X P 

a« av •«#»#• a» 

X P X X X 05 
p p p p "1^ 

P P X P O P 


P 05 P P h- 
t>- O- O- P P 


P P O 05 P P 
p p ^ ^ 


p 

05 

p 

a. 

p 

o- 

p 


p 

05 

p 


X .-( p P X 
p 1 —( I—' p P X 

P X 05 X P 

g '^to iCc'fco CO 
O- X P P X 
P P p I—I X P 


p p p p p p 
l-H P P P P 
p o P p cC O' 

of 05" of (X x" P 
t' i-H 05 X T?* 00 
i-t X X X P 05 


P P P X t' i-< 
^ ^ ^ ^ ^ 


X -H P 1 —( X 05 
TJ< X X 


CO 

M •» 

H 

r3 o 

Q_i 


D 

o 

Im 

»-l 

D 

P 

© 


D 

"d 

u 

M 

u 

O 


I-. 


r- »> 


D 

*© 

b, 

D 

D 


t**" fM, >*>• 






03 

4-» 

O 


W 

P 

P 


§ 

a>> 

n 

X 


p 1 —I p p p p 
O- P P 05 i-( X 
•^ © 'tf* 05 XP 


05 Pi“( 05 Xl'- 
^ X P 

X X i-< P 

OS cs CO CO (Of <p 
p p p •^»-( r' 
P O- 00 P t'l 05 




p p p p 
05 05 05 05 


p 

05 


O- 

X 

Tj* 

?3 

P 


S? 

05 


PXXXt'-05 
P 05 i-( P 05 P 
P P P P X X 

Tf^ os'00 CO p cc' 
^ P ^ t'. X X 

P X 05 P P (N 


X 05 P P P 
O- P 05 P P X 
P P P X P 05 

P CC •^p CD CC 
P P 05 X P P 
P P 05 P X P 


O- P P P X 05 
OI 05 05 05 05 05 




05 05 05 05 


C8 

O 


X 

X 

s 

p 

05" 

P 

05 

•» 


o P X P P X 
■■ r-( P X 00 1—1 
P f-H 05 o P 


gs 


P X 05 P 05 
05 t'. 05 O •-( 
P X O- P X P 


^ © © ^ X ^ 


X r' P © ^ 
O- O" X P 


X 


05 O- P ^ P P 
05 P P P X X 
X -^ © P P i-H 


05 P P P X X 
05 ♦—( 05 »-H ^ © 


i-( P P X 
©PXX 


05 

P 


P 

X 


© 

P 

© 


t>-05pxpr' 
©©X05Xt'i 
t^P P X P ® 


© 05 P X p 1—I 
p Tt< 1-1 © ^ 
05 05 © X ^ © 


X P P P X P 
P P t' P Tt< P 
05 r- © p t' p 

cc cc P cc 'cff 
P P P P P X 


O- (N 05 X P X 
X X i-H P P o 
P 05 05 t' © 

CO p'of Pi-Tp 
XXXXXX 


■SB 

Xi <0- 
3 > to 
O.Z'O 

^ aa 
®3 n-t 3 

o c 

^ ca 


Tt< 

P 

05 

a> 

X 

05 




X © P P 
© P 1—I t' 

P P X 05 05 


X O- 1-H X 05 X 
Xl-HTjlXPt' 
1-H 05 05 P P rH 


t'- P P P 05 
r- p p ^ X 
P P X X © P 


P X O- P © P 
05 X P © X P 
i-H X P P X 05 




P I-. P 
C5 ^ 1-H © 


05 t'- P P -H X 
© P X X P P 


X 


t>. 

© 


O X X P X w 
O O P Tf< 
X © 05 X X O 


© 05 Hji p 05 
1-H p X cO 
© © X X X CO 


X P P P X P 
O X r-( P P P 
05 P © P P X 


P X © 

05 (^5 O P 
O- 05 © O 


'if ^ 05 p 

aia>aiCia>oo 


In. p X p 05 r* 
XXXXXX 


d 

o 

6 

*3 

§ 

D 

>i 


cS 

•4^ 

o 

-*-» 

p 

X 

p 


>t 

>»J3 
p-g fe Q.S'd 


bl 

D 


■d bi 
O'? 


lO 


bi 

D 

d 

D 


fS o ► 


bl 

D 

a 

D 

D 

D 


ea 

o 

o 

p 


>» 
bl 

3- 
C'S 05 


ert 

3 


5 >» o 


to 
>» be 


o 

Xi 

d 


o 


D 


gid 
Di- 


b< 

D 

s a 

D 

> ' 


^cqO^Q i?<iCQCj5Q 


*3 

D 

O 

c, 

a 

D 

to 

d 

o 

to 

bl 

a 


to 

tc 

d 


cC 
D 

bl 

a 

D 

3 

ca 
> 
ca 

-4.S 

O 
d 

CO 
D' 
bl 


eo 

03 

D 

b 

03 


'd 

d 

(33 

*3 

b 

ca 

o 

m 


b 

3 D 

cc d 


03 


O 

o 


I*-* 

O o 

CO w 


D 

-4-9 

o 

d 

-4.9 

o 

o 


o 

CO 

—4 

ca 


D ca 

rd 

t; ^ 

wta a> 

rb 

D-^ 

W 

fw fl 
Di^ca 


gg 


CO 

M Co 
Sd^M o 
^x: 

S? 0*3 

^ b T* ® 

tfCOns 

c3 to D d 

Sst's 

o d Q 

o 2 tie o 

te -a B .g ^ c5 
P ca '.fS _ ^ 
-1- rt b ca'drQ 

§ o ad 
-e ^’d c3 ^ 
5 w .a jN c3 

S D -4^ > 

D D 3 S 


D 

rd 

-4-9 

d 

43 


b ^ 
D 33 
D 

b 


X3 43 ^ Cu-^ 

o 

CQ O to 

^ to D rl D CO 

5 < rH CO rH 
qj 3 qj b 

O ^ 


TJ 

D 


a 


ca 

b 

D 

ad 

o o 


CQ 


d 

3 to 43 

.2 

■3-^ o 
ca -4^ 
b o 
D C 

O o O G 

-2 . .ti -b ^ 
- — 03 D 


^ DXJ 
Gfe3'C 

O'— 

^3 


pg 

•»M - 

to 

a 




N - 

§ 

I rt -4^ -4.9 

'a o 

c3'G 2 O 

b 2 43 ^ 

. - O d '3 o3 

^ S D 

ca q> 

D o«2 g 

43 S . 

^ w 3 c3 

g «g D^ 

03 03 P'0‘3 

■d o w d .*2 

pv^ p d 
2 to o3 

a D S ^ X5 
ad « a - 
•-* d cijo’m d 
p b£)«b'4< o 

d-d 

^ ^ O D 
CO'^ ® 8 ^ 

•32^|-S 

*r^ ^ c3 —* 

h b o -b d 

-§ O P.2‘3 

ca a — 2 H 

s 

. D 03 

g g 
saSS- 
glo§“> 
t?§'^ao 

o £« 

•S-g.a 2 

03 

03 g 3 d ^52^^ 

1 ^ ^ o b d S o> 


CO 

ca 

•4^ 

CQ 

V.4 

O 

d 

o 

to 

> 




b I'' s 

P-e --d 


00 > ,2 3 p 'w 

•4.9 p qj b p ^ 

W d G *3 -p p 

o O.D a 

frt ^ d J-* 

g OP 3 to 03 

^ b*-^ O D p to 

2 mS*" 3 a 5 

S^'gigSgg.l 

'* V. d « 

o au) 


152 





















































































































































0\ 

Os 


§ 

0 

t 

k. 

rv 

2 

tD 

0 

k 

C. 

1^ 

k 

0 


c 

k 

• l^ 

S' 

k 

s 

s 

C^ 

tc 

c 

• i« 

c 

k 

o 


0 

g 

Q 

4w 

«0 

• m 

5C 

CC 

e 

g 

•M 

E 

•m 

k 

Oh 

"t! 

e 


•o 

3 

4*d 

3 

3 

0 


I 

c4 

c^ 

g 

es 

H 


O «D 

'71 ® 
Plh5 


O* 


CO t>- 


04 

lO 


05 


CO 

Is. 


t^ 

CO 

Ml 

04 

o 

5^ 

X 

Ml 

M* 

05 

Ml 

CD 

X 

05 

04 

9S 


05 

X 

X 

05 


Ml 

lO 

CO 



X 



M* 

X 

05 

v* V 

05 

lO 

X 

o 

05 

04 

X 

X 

X 

lO 

Ml 

O- 


*o 

c4 

lO 

M» 


lO 

ID 

X 

Ml 

Is. 

Ol' 

od 

od 

x' 

x' 

04 

id 


*> 

05 


04' 

cd 

05 

id 

t>- 

ed 

cd 

05* 

id 

lO 


04 

05 

Ml 

X 


T“1 

04 

X 



04 

Ml 

Ml 

CO 


X 

04 

04 

ID 

F—1 


OOC^ <P <3i 


ss 


CO 

00 


CO 


c^ 


lO O »0 iC 

_•■ #. •. 

o ^ o> *-< 


O 04 05 X 0 05 

CO 

Ml 05 04 O -H O 

Is. 

1-. CO Ml I- 04 I-H 


cdoToTcD o od 

04* 

04 »D F-( ^ I-H 

Is, 

ID C4 

9 


o» 

§ 


b- In. CS 00 
T»« CO C^ o 

00 t^ o<o 

wcocsTiO 


CO 

'O 

a 

s 

v« 

o 

rO 

3 

Ph 


a 

03 

CO 

o3 

o 

3 

3 

a 


CO 

o 


C3 

o 

o> 

a 

OD 


CP 

S O 

•4>3 


C'- 

l^ 

c^ 

<N 


ICO ^COCQi—l40*0O<Dt>»00O^t^ 
r^OCOQOO 0»OCOCO*-iC^®t^t^<OCOTt<0> 
OOiCDOOP »-»*^C^COCO»^COC^O<COcDr-«cO 


kOOO 


iO»0*-«t-HCOO>OOCOO*-«OiO’^ 

OS 1 ^ rH I-H tH 


CO 

coco 05 

^050 

co^Vod 

•-H c^ 


•^r-H-Tj^eOCOCDOOwOC^ 

O05O‘Ot0C^C000i-H 


oo 




<o 

CO 


05 CS ^ 

C^ 1-t 


t>i-<Q05 0500'^CCOS‘Ot^ 
OC0OT05»--ic0CSt^»-HC00> 
C^t'OOsMtN.cOO’-'COCS 

* 0 " cd" cd cd" wd t^r CD" *—r cT CO*" ccT 

<DC^COC0O500C0*O»-i(NcO 

00 1-H 1—I 


o »o 

t>- 
CO 


S5 


05 

CO 


OO-HCOC^ 
C0»0 uo 

05 CO CO 

odcd»d-^ 

^ Is. ^ 


olg 

u 

-3 02 
•— 0513 
-< 0^J3 

CD U 

-3 


8S 

CO 

c^f 


Cs. 

»c 


CS I-H IC io »0 

00 CO CO 
c^ •«»< CO c^i CO 

t^-cdcfcT'^’' 
t>* 00 CO o 


^t>-05i-Ht'.eOcOCO»CC^05t>-00 

co»0'^oooooo5»o«ooo’Tj«eoo 

00C005e000'^0^C000'^C^i-HO 


•<»< O 05 (N udoo 00 ^ 
h-O5Q^CO00»-<COCO 
UO ^ ^ ^ rH 


h-rs.05 
^ 05 CO 

c^ fs csi 


^ »o 

05 CO 
CO ts* 00 

cdcdcd 

00 lO CO 

1-H 




C5C<»C’^’^'*5f<'^cOcO 
C^Cprs»ts.cOt^»OC^rj< 
■^005 05 00i-Ht'-00'^ 

C^oors*'^-^rs.05cot^ 
W005OO00 05C0CDe0 
ts. ^ .-( ^ 04 -H o* 

U5 


t^O5CO»OO4^00'^O4»O^ 
»004O*^Q00»OO»0c0^ 
i-Hi—li—<CO<N05C000505l^ 

id'^’^cdodod'cdido'd'cdod 

ooocor>-ts,04u5^o5o50 

i^i-H»H*^^C004t>»»-HC0^ 
CO *—• 


CO t-l 
00 CO 
O CO 

05 
lO »-t 
05 


05 OC5 
04 04 00 05 
hs 00 05 t'. 

of-^cd*-? 

Tf*»OCOCO 
04 04 00 04 


cpg 
^ 3 
« C3 

*3 CO 

O C0 
CO 

ce 


03 

o 



O X X X X 

X 

O ID I-- O 04 

CO 

O 04 X X CO 

x' 

od Ml isTedoT 

o 

ID 05 X X O 

Ml 

id 

ID 

CO »D 1-H ID 04 


»C0400M<C004t*-'^^C000050 
»O0Q—‘O50400COCO‘O»OCO«-‘^ 
04001>‘0c0»0i0050405i0c004 

Q o'cd 04" o od C4 O tsT C4 o" 05** 
•^00 05c004t>-00c004<0i-<c5c0 
00c0'^c0»0t^00c00504050<0 


h". 04 04 »0 05 O 05 io »-H CO 00 »0 

X 05 00 F-H 00 X X 1 —I 05 X I-I o 

X^o-^ 04 o‘O to UO CO lO X I-H 

'd x cd tC x" cd oT 04' ^ 04** lid 

0 05 0 ts-iO X 04 05 O C4 t'-»0 
XCO04 f-H »-i 1-1 o XXX04 

^H CO 


i-HiDXts.a5MitOXXCOi-H 

T-HiDcOiD04iDMii-H0004 

Xi-HXiDOXcOX«DOiD 

t-05 
04 
X CO 

is^od‘dodMi‘i'^cdo4**04‘‘cdod 

»DiDCOOx04iDXMiO‘D 

04 X 04X»DMii-Hts.ijicOCO 

Ml* cd 

Ml ID 
Is. Ml 

Ml* 04* 

04** 

rH 


04 OiC X 
50 05 04 X 
<0 05 05 05 

cdcdC4‘04’ 
id 04 04 
IC* lO 


CO 

X 

lO 

x' 

§ 


04 

04 


X X O 05 I-H 
lo X I'* 

04 CO X CO 04 

i-h' bd i-T id oT 
TJ* X 05 CO 
CO I-H CO 04 




04XCOXOXXCOXC- 
05Xt^04 05 05 05XO»-H 

e4coo5t>.xi-Hi-Hioxx-^ 

o I-H* tsT o T-H id id-d* 04 oT oT tsT 04 

i-hXi-h^OSCOf-iCOOOCOiOi-h 

»OC-l>»Xi0050'HCiOXi-HX05 


ICOX X 04 o X C4 1 -H lO X X 
X04^ ^ 1-H CO I-H 05 04 04 CO 
CO XCO 04 O ts. GO 05 r-CO 

cdt>ro4"’didodcdcrcd 

X05^05X040‘^05 
04O504iO^Xi-h»Oh»i 


X 


»0iC05f-HOXX'^'HjiC005 

h-C0i0Oi0O04Xts.O*0 

COOIOO'«»*CDC005»00404 

4^i-H“rsrcdt^ododcdod'd''d 

04F-<c0XOX'*tiC5tN.04X 

•^COii»*COXX04XCO^CO 

x' -d ^ i-h“ 


X lO 
X X 
t>.05 

O cd 

^ 04 
lO IC 

'd 


Cs- O ^ 05 

04 xcox 

X 04 lO X 

udidofcd 

X04 CO CO 
t- tN. rf O 

04' 


03 

u 

o 

TJ 

OP 

fe 


CO 

a 

. 03 

OP bo 


o 

Ui 

Q. 


a 

3 

CO M 
tuo b 

1^ 

u 

w 


S’So- 

^ d 
« «3 

£ fe 


Ck 


o 

X 


r- 


s 


iOXXe4 COi-HX0504i-HX05i004F-‘t^04 
COOXX iOTrC50XiOXX»OQCOX05 
04r-iCOX X04^t>-0004xi004050c0 


04 1^'^-O5^- 
I-H X o o 
CO CO O CO 


Xi-'XXi-HiOXXCOiOT-iX'^ 

J^COcOO5t>-rHCpx04'FrC4Tf 


04 


t-*04 04'^t'-*OXHtiOcOiO 


05 I-H f—i 04 ^ 04 ^ 


04 04 04 


X Hf X 
CO CO 
X IC X 

i-n'cdcd 

04 0 04 
^ ts. X 
^ 

X I- I-H 


XiO<OOX'«C<050"itf^ 
04050XCO‘004 04-H 
ls.iOiOt''i-HX004Hti 

•s • _•» «S 

OJ^iOXiiiiiCt-t^OS 

iO'»t'X04rs.coxxio 

OXi-Hf-H-^OO^XCO 


3 CO 


Hjl 3 

04 


I-S 04 3 I-H 


Oi--05 05 05C005lCC4t'«00 
0'i»iiOXiCi!fico040*Mt>. 
■^t^iOCOC-i-icOX-^i-HO 

Oi-ro5i-H"idcdidtsro4crod 

^TfiOCs-iOCOOs^cOOi-H 

i-HXX»-«»Ots-Ot-t-C-X 

04' 04**04' 04'‘O4’‘ cd id ^ 04'*cd od 


S!f1 

C- lO 
X X 

Hfi 04 


*H o X X 
X lO X X 
lO O F-t X 

oddof d 

Hfl I-H 04 O 
^ O CO lO 


•l 

s 


04 X 04 ts. 04 


r^M 


a 

C3 

bO 

o 

u 

pH 


OP 

3 

Vi 

3 

t-l 

CP 

p 

O' 

o 


Is 

^ s 


O CP 


OP 

f-i 


p 


c3 

•4^ 

o 

H 


ts. 

CO 

CO 

t'T 

04 

05 

s 

X 


X 05 04 X X 

t-h (3i o 

X X t>- 05 I-H 


•-Hi-HO*ooo50'^i-Hcots.xr^ 

00rHC'4i0c0O04i-':04itii0^X 

l>-C5I'-04l0X04I'-0-OTfiC005 


X r-- o X 

—< I-' X >o 

t- O- T-* 05 C4 


iCC0050404X'^'^iCi-HOicr’04 

C004C00051#'IOOX’-H1-HIO|-H 

XHf<O5cO04t-COiOt'--«t‘XO5X 

id r-T d d 


o CO t--. 
*-• X 05 
X C4 C4 

x'os'd 

X «-• 05 
X 05 t>. 

did* 


IOOX04CO»-HIC0505 

C005X005TJ<COOQ 

Xi-iXOOXXCOiO 

04 ' cd odoT x" O5'ido4'o 
iCH»irs.ooxt--X4^i^< 
lOO»t>-rHC00504t^X 


o 

X 


X 


Xi-Hooi-Hr>-t>-oxxo405 

XO5iO04Xr>-COX»OCOX 

05i!tiC0'^t-’|^rtits.t^X'V 

' x* cd X id cdcd^' ^ <dcd 


t^t'-XC4^idO5C0cO»C 

Oi0XX»00405XX05 

«—1 05 1>- I-H ^ lO 
04 I-H 


X 

Ml 

X 

|S- 

X 

X 

05 

04 

Ml 

iD 

Is. 

CO 

t- 

fH 

X 

04 

ID 

Ml 

x' 

•ft 

Is, 

•ft 

Is. 

id 

od 

04' 

Ml 

ID 

X 


CO 

X 


ID 

ID 

X 

ID 

CO 

id 






X 








X 

04 04 ID O CO 

OMii-HOOCPi-HC004i-HiDiDQ 

OMiiDMi^iDOXCOiDXiDO 

XXXts.M“Dt-ts-COOOO»D*D 



04 X 05 ^ Is. 


X 

Is. X i-H X CD 

od 

cd 

<o tsTcdcdoT 

OSCSOi-HiDXKoiMicdi-HOO 
XM’‘D05fs.00XOXMi04M'ts* 
»Dts-MiCOi-Hi-HeOiDCO»—‘»DO504 

ID 

04 Is. eo X X 

o 

»D 

X O i-i ID I-H 

E-* 

04** 

CO 

04 

•k 

04 X I-H X I-H 

04 04XX04Mix^XF-iMiiDiD 
X 



I'- F-< ID 04 —1 

^X04C0Is-i—iX04OXiDIs.X 


xox I-H r>-05 ic CO CO 05 1 -CO 

*'.040 'if04Ht<O5l>-X'-'iOX 
CO I-H 1-H Is. O X O I-H CO ^ X 

*d04'x' x'04 iddcddcdo cd 

I-H005 ^XOO^l'-04iOC5 
05 I-H HJI ts. o ^ 05 X ts* CO I-H Ml 


XI>iCOi-HCOCOls.04MiiOCO 
005ts.i-H05 04 04MiXXl^ 
004ts.OC504t>.ot>-’-Ht'- 


b- cox 05 
XC4 O X 

I-H o to 


. lO CO Ml lO 10 
Ml 05 Q O Ml 
I-H IC 0X04 


10 10 04 


05 


lO 

X 

04 


X CO 04 X 


XMiXXM*COO4XMi04CO 
10 Ml ^ I-H 


ID 

X 

CO 

Is. 

t-s 

ID 

O 


ID 


Is. 

05 

Ml 

Ml 

Is. 

O 

04 

1-H 

cd' 

04" 

•. 

*-H 

x" 

x" 

05 

ID 

04 

1-H 

*D 

o 


X 

Ml 


CO 

X 

Ml* 

x" 

Ml 

•ft 

X 


cd 


^33^3 cOiS 

ot; S.3 a 

Cj 3 c3 C fH 

a-3 


Ml 

05 

04 

X 

t-- 

04 




I— X M- O 
C4 F- Ml X 


M* CO M* Is. »xs 

04 X X 05 f- Ml O 




f—I M* Is. 05 
I-H X 05 ot- 


ts.TtiI^ 10 X 04 X Ml X X I-H CD 

I-HMIIO 04 04 CO X o Ml ^ 04 Is¬ 
os 10 X X CO I-H CO Ml O CD 04 I-H 


04ts.Xts.OC005i-H04i0i0 

XCOO»OiOCOi-Hls.MiC5X 

lOXXiOiOCSMiMiMiXX 


I- t>- X I-H 

X IC X Ml O 
X 04 I-H CO C4 


04t''05MiXi-iXXMits. 
•-H05 X 05XI-H04QOC0 
iCts.M'COi-HC4M’iOts»i-H 


005 CD 

« X I-H 
05 I-H IC 


lOi-Hi-nXiCI^Xi^X 

I^Mii-HMiiCOI^Xi-H 

Is*0l04t'»XXC0i-HiC 


ts-ts.XO05XC0X0li005 

05C4i-HCOXMi04C004X04 

i-hOM*COCOi-hi-hXX04i-i 


04 X I-H X 


X 04 X X 04 Ml X 
X 


X 


Ml IC lO 


ic IC 04 I-H 05 I-H 00 ^ X CO 04 X 
F-4 fM X 

04 


XMIXXMI<OXXM'04CO 

Ub ^ f-4 1—1 



ID 

X 

Ml 

05 

X 

X 

O 

o 

ID 

05 

Q 

»D 

X 

CO 

X 

04 

X 

od 

■k 

05 

05" 

od 

d 

x’ 

CO 

Is. 

04 

X 

CO 

o 


X 

Ml 

1-H 

Is. 

X 

id 

x" 

Ml" 

X** 

•ft 

x" 


3 

p 

03 

OP 

oS 

H.H 

CO^ 


p 

o 

<0 


03 

£ 

OS 


> s 

•-1 CO 

'3d 

.a S 

d 

Pi 

o3 

&£ 

o 

«> 

o 


c3 

o 

£h 


p 

< 

o 

w 

H 


Vi 

S'®' 

» Vi 


cd 


'3 

p 


p 
cd 


g 


OP 

^ VA iL ^1.13 Vh CP • fl 

£=3 


'3 

(m 

o 


p 


'3 

CP 

Spq 
P' 3 
p 


2»- 

Oi 


ptp'K 

O bJP CP 


g-c s S S § § 2 S'S S 5 Ki2 « ® pif 

ppqWI^^ p wpqfqQpL<h^,-3K^JS^l5oQ;^ 

vj 


p 

o 

o 


03 Cd 


CP 

o 

p 

CP 

3 

• -H 
> 
o 

Vi 

Ph 

• • 

3 

p 

cd 

F*1 

CO 

VH 

CP 

3 

o 

d 

pc; 


H 

◄ 

H 

<J 

H 

h] 

p 

p 


CP [> 
CO 1^ 
Vh CP 


CP 


CO 


2 

CP 

d 




p 


Vi 

o 


CP 

C3 b£'^ 


CP 

CO 

3 


CP CP 


03’O 
-H O 


eo 

Vi 

CP 


‘cog 

—1 B 

So 

03 1.^ 
> 


Ci3 S 


a 

CP 

^d *H 
P CP ® 

oS 0.2 s’ 

d cpd vi-y d^ CP 



2 
O cc3 

03 ri 

CP .3 


CP 


sg.' 

cd 




vhCP»:,jh;33<iJ®-^o bs-*-* O ^'v:3r:.i CPH-I Vi754^.ii cy 
CP 


i5 


p 

CP 

Pt 


3 

o ca 

Q.CP 

rtPP 

oOcQ.cdW^^^oQ 
3 '3 

» p 


153 


TerreHaute_-___t 4.239,720 ' 4,227,841 I 278,306 L._.i...1 3.139,323 ! 810,212 i 584,420 I 201,481 ' 24,311 I 11,879 

See footnotes at end of table. 









































































































































































Table Ji-2.~Atnount of public and private assistance and earnings under specified Federal work programs, by urban area, J939—Continued 



CO CD 
COCO 


O 1^ 
lO 00 
CO 00 


•^00 00 
40> 


o OS eo CO 

O O »-l O CO 

CO CO os 

r>»cococoos 

os 


o os 

pH o OS 

OS 

rf pH b- 

pH so b* 

so 

C4XpH 

X OS b* 

rf 

pf bfrjT 

rjfrf sff 

x" 

CO X CO 

X CO o 

X 


pH C4 pH 






^ 

iO os 

(N CO O ‘O 


1 O »-t 
■ t^O 

lOStN. 


•* PS •• Wk Pk * 


OS Ol t>» OS 

t^cooi 

T-* 


ICO so 

I 

I 

I 

I 

t 

I 

I 

« 


t>. »0 CO 

00 OS OS 
O CO 

coco'iff 1^" 

Ol rH 




SO 04 X IN 

t-k OS SO rf 

o 

so pH X ^ 

pH X CO rf 

CO 

rf 04 O X 

O X bi N 

OS 

ak ak ak ak 

pH CO Q so 

ak ak •«. » 

'If OS O pH 

rf 

rf OS 

PH SO b- X 

C4 

pH 


pH 


CO 


o> 


CO O OS lO 

00 O 00 CO 

1 -f CO t>* 00 CO CO 

tCf-TcOr-^hS SCO so 

CO 00 ^ 


© 

gs 

pH O CO 

X OS CO OS O 

CO »0 rf 

0*0 0 

sOOSX'^04b-XpHO 

OS pH O X 

*0 b- 

1 

1 X 

CD CO pH 


bi b* t— 

b-b4 Xrf OS 

O b- O 

O 04 so 

04b-ifCOOSb-XifOS 

CO OS If so 

OS O 

1 ^ 

pH X CO 


kd 

kPH 

pp 

C4 PH 


0C40if pH 

0*0 04 

OS OS pH 

'^OCOXb-XpH<004 

04 OS X pH 

X pH 

1 pH 

X If CO 


o d 

Hkd — 

ocT^ 

p p 

b- pH Q 
pHpH^ 

ak ak ak ak ak 

CO CD CO CO »0 

Xso'rf 

ak ak 

CO X CO 

0 fif"rf"so"x"o‘00‘pH" X 

b^pH~C0"O 

ak ak 

OS 04 

* ak 

»bi 

a» ^ fk 

CO O O 


so pH 

CO pH 

04 so X 

C4 g 04 

04 04CO0Sb-XpHSOX 

PH pH O pH 
pH 


1 CO 

1 

1 

1 

X X 04 


73,3 


< 









1 

1 

1 




o 00 r>- 
O CO o 
00 OS A 

^ 00 
*o o 


00 CO »-i CO 
00 00 O CO oi 

CO O CO ^ o 
^ 

o so ^ O 00 

^ ^ CO 


S t^ 

o 

oTco* 



4^ 

04 

X 

rf 

rf 


o 

SO 

SO 

so 


X 

04 


»o 

If 

CO 


d rt 

^H 

04 

o 

b« 


SO 

04 

»o 

so 


04 

t- 

o 

CO 

b- 

so 

o 

2 d 

so 

04 


t- 

04 

rf 

O 

X 

so 

os 

OS 

«o 

o 

OS 

X 

SO 


73 

CO 

ak 

X 

pH 

X 

of 

CO 

co" 

04" 


av 

X 

bT 

04" 

fk 

b* 

a 

cs 

a 

rf 

ak 

fH 


d'^ 

rf 

so 

CO 

OS 

OS 

O 

b- 

CO 

X 

o 

OS 

o 

b- 

pH 


os 

•— 

©33 


pH 


pH 

04 

04 

X 

X 

04 

X 

CO 

04 

pH 

rf 

X 


© © 






a 

rf 












'O 


















CO so N »0 00 O 00 »0 00 r^-ctiOOOS 

so *-1 O O O »-i CO O so O CO OS 

O OS O C^l CO 00 t>» o o»oi^co 

<occ^fOaiC^'^c^oo <^'«i^"‘so’'oo 

0000 ^ l>. so cs CO o^«coc^ 

1-1 oi»-( 1^1-j 


sot'-oo SOCO-I^IO .-H 1 -H CO CO 00 CO titri 

Tf<co'«!}ico t^cooco h«cooi c^cosocoo^ 925S 

osoc^lt^ so so so CO O OS O so COSO 

ocTo^ooco t-Tos'oos o'oo'V -^co os'co-co <5 

rHC^^lN. OS O O h-^OS so t>-CO o »o OOCO 

c<l 1-11*1 OSi-HW ^ 


CO 

cs 

Q. 

>> 


C3 

ppH 

o 

<0 

a 

CO 




O 

so 

X CO 

OS 

04 

o 

CD 

os 

04 

o 

O 

b. 

rf 

X 

X 

X 

»o 

o 

ip< 

CO 

X 

os 

o 

b- 

X 

X 

b. 

t- 

so 

X 

OS 

OS 

© 

w> 



pH 

OS OS 

04 

O 

OS 

SO 

rf 


o 

so 


X 

rf 

pH 

os 

If 

OS 

04 

CO 

rf 

04 

so 

pH 

CO 

SO 

OS 

OS 

O 

CO 

b- 

o 

© 

CO 

X 


SO 

X 

X 

If 

OS 

If 

b- 

o 

X 

b- 

rf 

04 

If 

X 

rf 

pH 

X 

OS 

CO 

b- 

OS 

CO 

pH 

04 

04 

so 

o 

os 

so 

a 


ak 

b- 

ak 

O 

p4^bf 

ak 

bi 

pH 

X 

x" 

pH 

of 

rf 

04" 

rf" 

04" 

rf 

ak 

X 

o"br 

a 

04 

* 

OS 

pH 

a 

b. 

a 

so 

OS* 

a* 

If 

cd 

a 

X 

OS* 

ak 

X 

SO 

bT 

so” 

zS 

1 

A— 


04 

X 

X OS 

rf 

OS 

b- 

SO 

OS 

CO 

rf 


X 

X 


o 

04 

so 

rf 

o 

b- 

X 

so 

X 

OS 

b- 

so 

pH 


CO 

OS 

o 

OS 

73 

lA 

O 

If 

X PH 

If 

o 

CO 

04 

SO 

X 

X 

CO 

X 

CS 

so 

OS 

OS 

OS 

04 

t- 

X 

X 

CO 

If 

so 

04 

»o 

X 

X 

04 

04 

OS 

o 

C/S 

a> 



X 


a 

^4 



a 

pH 

x" 

ak 

pH 

04 




of 

04" 

a 

a 


a 




04 







X 00 o o 
CN so (M 
CO OS X 

co'‘os"t>rc4' 

CO X so OS 
sc U1 OI CO 


l>* so 

t-. UI CO 
OS so X 

x^x^co 

X CO I>1 
ti. »-i X 


so CO CO so bi 
00 X OS 

pH o 00 O so 

oT so csT •»*<' CO ^ 

X OS OS CO ^ X 
pH rH pH pH O 


X CO 

OI so 

X 
pH o" 

S3 


ca 

o 

Eh 


04 

04 

02 

o 

so 

so 

rf 

b- 

X 

X 

rf 

b- 

04 

OS 


If 

CO 

05 

o 

o 

CO 

so 

SO 

CO 

so 

rf 

X 

so 

rf 

so 

04 

OS 

04 

os 

b- 

so 

o 


CO 

CO 

X 


X 

X 

O 

X 

b. 


OS 

so 

o 

so 

CO 

04 

rf 

OS 

so 


X 

OS 

04 

OS 

rf 

04 

b- 


so 

05 

CO 

04 

X 

•o 


OS 

rf 

o 

so 

rf 



X 

fH 

If 


so 

so 

rf 

CO 

X 

so 

so 

X 

CO 

rf 

SO 

05 

X 

CO 

o 

rf 

04 

X 

CO 

X 

OS 

so 

CO 


O 

•o 

b- 

OS 

OS 

X 


X 

X 

OS 

SO 

fH 

04 

OS 

CO 

rf 

X 

X 

04 

04 

X 

so 

b- 

X 

X 

rf 

OS 

04 

b- 


*o 

so 

CO 

pH 

o 

OS 

a 

04 

of 


X 


04 

O 

tH 

OS 


o 

o 

cd 

OS 

04 

o 

X 

o 

X 


rf 

o 

X 

rf 


X 

OS 

fH 


so" 


o 

a 

OS 

OS 

of 


cd 

os' 

rf 


a 

b- 

04* 

a 

OS 

of 

cd 

a 

rf 

X 

so 

pH 

o 

CO 

CO 

CO 

X 

04 

b- 

b- 

b- 

cs 

b- 

CO 

04 

04 

X 

04 

OS 

CO 

rf 

04 

X 

b- 

OS 

X 

CO 

»o 

OS 


04 

rf 

05 

X 

1— 

O 

CO 


I— 

O 

X 

X 

rf 

rf 

o 

os 

20 

pH 

SO 

SO 

X 

X 

OS 

CO 

OS 

*o 

b* 

04 

CO 

pH 


X 

tH 

fH 

b- 

o 


SO 

b. 

b- 

b. 

rf 

X 

CO 

so 

rf 


X 

so 

CO 

CO 

rf 

»o 

b. 

X 

b. 

04 

04 

04 

04 

04 


X 

b- 





a 

b- 







04 

X 



fH 

04 

rf 

04 



a 




X 





a 





pH 


x“ 





a 





CO 


03 
u 

'§' 

u u 
« tc 
73 O 
d 

gft 

CO pM 
bX) ^ 

w 






b. 

SO 

SI 

CO 

04 

b- 

CO 

X 

rf 

O 

SO 

X 

X 

04 

X 

X 

04 

so 

X 

so 

CO 

b. 

X 

X 

X 

h- 

b- 

X 

CO 

o 

X 

CO 

b- 

Tf) 




CO 

If 

rf 

o 


OS 

X 

b- 

CO 

o 

b- 

b- 

04 

If 

so 

rf 

SO 

X 

CO 

SO 

04 

b. 

04 


X 

C3S 


CD 

rf 

rf 

X 

cs 

OS 


© 

© 


X 


OS 


OS 

CO 

04 

b- 



X 

X 

SO 

SO 

rH 

04 

O 

o 

o 

SO 

b- 

b. 

b. 

If 

04 

X 

os 

X 

SO 

X 

o 

o 

04 

© 

© 

o3 

kd 


x" 

a 

b. 

so 

a 

X 

cd 

so" 

of 

sd 

a 

b. 

o 

x" 

of 

sd 

co" 

a 

CO 

a 

so 

so 

of 

rf 

X 

»d 

a 

CO 

a a 

pH O 

os" 

'If 

os" 

a 

b- 

a 

rH 

X* 

X 

o 

SO 




Ph 

rf 

O 

X 


X 

CO 

05 

CO 

04 

Q 

OS 

b. 

X 

CD 

04 

o 

X 

ns 

rf 

X 

»o 

b. 

SO 

b- 

b- 

b- 

X 



so 

b. 

rf 


o 

© 

t>s 


O 

04 

X 

o 

pH 

»o 

O 

X 

b- 




rf 

CO 


pH 


X 

b. 

X 

OS 

04 

04 

o 

CO 

CO 

o 

os 


b. 

X 

'If 

o 

Ph 

Uk.£3 

O 


t 

pH 


^4 


rf 

X 

X 

rf 

04 


»o 

os 

SO 

b. 

to 

rH 

SO 

o 

X 

X 

b. 

X 

CO 



o 

rH 


rH 

04 

so 

pH 


cd 

fH 

a 

a 

b. 


X so CO 
1*11— h- CO 
CO X O X 

oftCso'ccT 

PH t- bp. CO 
t>. (N pH OS 

X^ph co‘‘of 


X If OS 
CO OS 
If If CO 




OS pH 

o 

t-<MOS 


XCOphOCOC^ Ifl— 
X so OS t— rf pH 
WXCOXO^ O? CO 

od‘csrorpH''io"so‘‘ cd'co 
osb-xr—xco OS X 

Xt-b-OXX XX 

.k a^ a^ 

pH pH pH pH fH 



<9 
«p* 
0 ^ 
• p4 

pH 

o 

Sh 

'3 

u 

o 

d 

o 

o 


TJ S— 

0.2 

IH 


Ot_ 

QJ o 
u 

♦ 1 ^ 

P2 


ca 

HH 

o 

Eh 


pHO 
pH (N 
X -If 

OS so" 


t— pH OS 
X I— b- 
b« X so 

_ ai. 

so OS pH 
C<1 04 If 
X pH CO 


OS If X X cs 
C^sO'^CObp 

b- *0 If cs OS 

a^ Bk Vk ». 

X OS b- o 
b* 'f so b- CO 
CO X CO so X 

ak 

OS 


00 CO b- 
(N <N O 
0 X0 

CO CO p-T 
PH 04 04 
pH t- 

of so" of 


pH o O 
b- CO b. 
04 pH X 

cTscTTHtf 
X b- o 
O bi pH 


0ssoifif04s004*^04 
if04 X 04sO'^C004sO 
C00Sb-pH04 X 04C00S 

ofpfx'sosrfTfbfClOO 

bpXXOOSb-COOSX 

04S0OS04XXPH4OCO 

^ ^ ^ fk ak ak ak 

pH 04 b" pH pH pH 


OS X CO CO 
CO If »-• X 
b. If OS pH 

as ak •« fk 

»0 X X X 
04 b» pH ^ 
Hf X PH CO 

CO 


X OS b- bp 

X ox X 

so CD pH CO 

a. a. fk a«» 

O pH so OS 
X pH pH pH 
Tf so 


OS o OS »o 
04 so b. OS 
OS pH o X 

C4"ph x"br 
b-b* OS If 
PH 04 


so b« 04 
X X b- 
os O CO 

pH X pH 

rf X CO 
Hf X 

of 


SOpHCOpHCSSO 04 pH 
b- pH o CO X 04 X so 
pHXOSOOSbk b.if 

00 If" so OS so of HfO 
XC004C004X Hf 04 


ca 

o 

Eh 


O 

b- 

05 

b. 

CO 

pH 

rf 

X 

so 

04 

04 

pi 

04 

04 


X 

b- 


OS 

04 

SO 

SO 

X 

04 

X 

OS 

X 

o 

SO 

p^ 

b- 


so 

04 

b- 

OS 

b- 

04 

If 

pH 

o 

SO 

o 

rf 

SO 

rf 

o 

SO 

so" 

so 

of 

o 

X 

of 

a 

b- 

b^ 

so 

of 

o 

of 

of 

so 

rf" 

O 

SO 

X 

b. 

so 

X 

o 

os 

»o 

X 

X 

X 

CO 

so 

X 

CO 

X 

OS 


CO 



CO 

X 

pH 

04 

rf 

o 

CO 

X 

X 

O 

SO 

so 

of 

x" 

a 

rH 

of 

a 

^H 

a 

a 

b- 

rf 

a 

04 

OS 

X 

of 

a 

o 

pH 

cd 






so 





pH 

pH 

04 


b-OS04 0SHfb.OXO OXOSCO 
b-so O COIf b* Os so CO PH X X 
CO X O O X O »0 pH If pH O PH so 

cd'if"cD OSO 04 bTx'p-T ifCOOcTccr 
XOOXpHOSifOX OSSOOSX 
X CO Hf pH so pH PH Tf pH SO 04 CO CO 

OfsO^Hf Cs"obr 04 "x*'C 0 O 4 "x*‘so"of 

pH pH If pH pH 04 


XOS 04 o 
CO pH so CO 
04 OS If X 

of so of so* 
04 O b- b. 
X so PH o 


pH 04 pH pH 
Os b» b. pH 
Ob- •'f CO 

cf ocTof co" 

X X so pH 
^ 05 X b. 


OS b- b. 

M* O X 
X If CO 

Xif of 

X PH CO 

OS CO O 


PHXSO-^SOO XOS 
OOpHCOifif XsO 
04 X PH b-o OO 

pfiffcd'xobT bfof 

b-040XpHO Xif 

XpHPHXb-P-t Xb- 


b.pH04OS- ifpHCCX 04 OS pH PH PH pH 04 of pHX“ 



X If 
X X 
rf X 

*k *k 

O X 
b. OS 
OS rf 

fk ak 

so 04 


Os OS X 
X b- rf 
04 b. CO 

bfso bf 

b- CO OS 
CD If If 

•k ak ak 

Xph 04 


pH OS 04 X so 
SO X If X 04 
»0 b- X b- SO 

OS o so"CO 04 " 

OS o CO X rf 
b- OS pH 04 rf 

pH rfbf*^" of 

SO 


04 CO pH 
b- pH X 
04 C4 b- 

ak fk ak 

pH b* X 
rf SO pH 
pH b» OS 

of 00 of 


X If 04 
04 04 04 
b- O X 

of of CO 

pH 04 X 
O X CO 


04 


CO 


X O 04 CO so rf o X pH b-O rf 

X CO 04 04 CO If b-CO SO -^OXb- 

pH rf 04 b. X CO SO pH pH b-SO 04 C4 

<^io'soc4"ofp-rbfobf bfcd'cood 

b-O X If rf pH If pH X OS SO C4 If 

SO CO SO CO SO 04 pH pH SO 04 X CO 

of SO rf ofGfbr04"x CCf ofx"»QOf 

pH pH If pH pH 04 


X pH O X 
04 X rf i-H 
b- PH SO b- 

o"ofof cf 

X PH pH t>« 

X SO 04 04 


X pH CO »0 
O pH CO SO 
pH CD 04 X 

rjToo CO bf 
OS If 04 OS 
rf O OS b. 


OS O 04 
O X 04 

X PH pH 

x" b-’ of 

^ pH CO 
pH CO 04 


PH If SO SO CO OS 
O SO OS CO pH 04 
04 O 04 O so OS 

p-T 04"rf"br of 04 " 

bk X O rf OS pH 
SO pH PH If b- pH 


bkpH04OS rf04ccfx X of ph'ph'pH p-T of Of 


XpH 
04 OS 
b- X 

04 " bf 

ss 

as as 

pH X 


73 

g 

cT 

c3 

CO¬ 
OS 
<v 
u 

03 


d 

o 

a^ 


a^ ^ 

> 3 

• ^ CQ 

TJX) 

kd 

d. 

03 

& 

O 

OS 

o 


73 

(O 

d 

d 

d 

o 

O 

I 

1.4 

< 

Di 

H 

;z; 

» 

O 

m 

d 

o 

12; 


CO 

a 

.9.tJ 


t>» 

•a—« 

O 


ea 


d 

o3 


CO Okd 

d 0*0 C3 ^ q 03 

bfl ’p* « • 


CO 

73 

a 
& 

o 

'rt c3 

il ’Pk 

«-s 


c3 ca TS 


.9o3 

bfl 


co3t*.- 

a>o2o3oL”o"c;'—i-iQ—’(^3.’^ • 

rtflm «WE^^2 PPhOPhoq gfiSS 

& 
o 


CO 
O 

Qi-P 
03 j3 

d^ 
d:r 


O 


ca 

'3 

a 

.20 

S d 

o u 

«5 

D 


d 

03 




^ 3 

S-O 

'3 fi 

> d 


73 


<0 

d«o ^ 
o 



» 

H 

d 

o 

CQ 

Q 

Z 

Q 

H 

z 


»-4 

rj 

d 

H 

z 


<0 


CJ 


5 M 


.a' 


ca 
d ® 

d O d rr; M a cjj^ uw — 

o°oS§1:^Ol5®-Sd;dte.2 

*H q Q ^*Ck2 3 d Skd 0 

sMco 2 

§ !ziO ^ 


<1 

n 

H 

P 

O 

CO 


a 

C3 

kd 

bjO 
d ® 


d 

o 

ta 

d 

kd 

o .. 

-»-> C8 

®'9 

■3 S 


a a 


03 

a 

03 

kC 

03 


a ’^*d Q> O 

«. o C33 ir — 


»2 

d 

o 

CO 


03 

d 

cd 


k2 

CO 

d 

o 


a 


CO 

d 

03 

O' 

O 


2 

I 


ca 


ca 

d 


g«;d 


a 

<D 

OS 


d 

o 

CO 

o 

p^ 

S3 

kd 

O 


di 'Ok2S-d 


wj a ^ . 




o d q' 

om3 


o 

fl? o • 

d 

>'2 §^'§ a| 

£§ 0^1 go 

^ -d _ CO kd tp 

cci £ 72 *< 00 ^ 

ii - 


08 

3 ®3 

^.9 ;§.2 

iSidga 

q 03 S « d 

22S^^^ 

t; d d 
kM o 
OmEh 


154 


ashviUe. ' 2,607,263 1 2,587,487 I 38,374 '__^.•.‘ 1,938,152 ‘ 610,961 * 381,191 I 201,552 > 28,218 ‘ 19,776 





























































































































































<o 1C cfl CO 

OC^ CO 

oo<oo»oo 

O'^'^'odco 
kO coo 


SS5 

o c^*" 
»—1 


■ <o 
11'- 
I ^ 

Io» 

I 

I 


OiCO^O'^COOiCO C“« 

o a> CO o <o Oi 00 CO 

OC^ OS O rH o 00 O 00 
CO os^*^" CTOs'•^t^Tco*' of 

t; CO OJO CO OJ O- 

C9 cs .« 


OS 

cs 


OOOl 
1-H CO cO O 
t>- CO OI 

oTosTifod 


CO OS 00 OCO 00 OOO 
OI 00 OS 00 O O CO os*c 
CO o OS 00 o- 00 "^ 

•^kC^kCO’-fcsfoOiO coof 
i-< 00 CO 00 u5 r-t oscoi 

00C< f-hC5 


OSO"^!^ «c ^ ooco »c t^os ^ t^CO 

»-hOCOC^ CO O os OI ^ 00 rHkO' 

OSC^C^rr< 1-t CO COCO CO ft 00 »oo| 

t^tCod‘0' oorCc^p-TcTkOOco »-r»ol 

»-H rH CO OS OS (N 00 OS CO rj< O O Ol, 

CO ko w »o *o oi 


OS 

CO O r-H b* 

OS »0 00 o 

of o' CD V Q 
o b» CO o 

O »-• o- 00 ts. 


oooooco 

b- i-« (N 

CO oTco 

00 *-1 


O CO COO OS CO O OSOS 

00 00 b^ CO O b«* >0 

OS 00 o-OS T-H CO OS »-< cooc! 

cTcd'ofbfiCco'cob^ ’^cd'l 

lO OS CO 00 CO b-CO »0 rH 00 
CD OS ic 00 b^ OS rH 00 

OCfiHCfcOCOrHrH cf 
C4 


b^ OS Ht* 

»0 b» ic fH t>. 
0^*0 000"^ 

co‘'0<0'^*'c^ 

rH Tt< b» CO CO 

OrHt>»OOt^ 


rH kO CS »0 
CO kO 

CO br CO b^ 

ocd CO Off 

rH rb kO OS 


1H CO OJ b* OS 00 kC OS 

OS rHCO b» »C UD OS h}< IC 1 

kO kO OS Hj< b» »o 00 CS oco 
crToTosoTrH'T-fb^oT co-^ 

CO CO br OS rH 00 CO OS rHTj- 
00 00 kO OS b-CO OI CO CO'^’i 




CO rH OS OS rH 


CO 


00000 00 05 
kC CO 00 b» CO 
CO O OS rH 

kT rH* CO oT bf 

b- br OS rH b» 

CD 00 00 coo 
of cfofco 


C>S rH OS b« 

CO o 

CD^ coos 
ofos'co tC 

kO rH tr 

OS OS 00 


OS rH CO 00 OS O rH COb- 
»0 OS o OS OS CS OS kOkOl 
OSCO »0 CO CD CO 00 b^OS 

CO bfkO CO’^rH'rtJ'o coco 
OS OS b-00 O kO CO OS coos 
CO OS OS O CO OS Tf< CO CD 

^OdlH COrH CO'CjJ'Of kQ CO 
OS rH 


CO Ht* 00 OS 

OS coco 00 

CO 00 00 rH 


O 

kO rH 

OS CO 


OS 

S3 


b- CO •«»« CO 
es kO rH kO 
CO 00 

CO bf^CO 
br OS CO 00 
OS 


rHb-OSkO-^^^QOOS 

■^COOSCOCOOSb-rH 

OSrH'^OSO'^OO 

CO od'bf “O'CO bf c^of 
O'^COOSOSOOrHOO 

COkOCOOOOOb-rHb* 

oco rH-^ rH 


CO , 
OS b- 
kO 

hjT OS’i 

S '^'l 


00 00 00 OS CO 

O OS b- b. 

cO ^ ^ ^ ^ 

rH^OS^r-ToObT 
^ kO OS CO 
OSOOOtr 00 


oosoooo 

OS OS rH 
CO CO CO 00 

coco c^oT 
CO >0 CD 
tH 00 CO rH 


kO kO 

ss 


cfr-TcOCOCO rHlH OS 


rH br lO <S0 rH o 
OS OCD OS OS ^ 
brrHOSOSOCD 


CDkO’^rHCOOkOOS 

CD^rHrHrHCS^O 

»OCOkOOSOSH»<OOrH 

oT CD CO b^ rf'od'bfko 

CD k-H OS 


CD *0 
osool 

CO b* 

tjTosI 
•<^coj 
O koi 


HfkCOOC^t^ 
rH rH 00 O O 
rH CO O*^ *0 

OfbfcDii;^ 

rH kC CO OS 
OS O 00 X 00 

co'iH eoco'co' 


rH 00 ^ 
brb»OSOS 
b-00 CO OS 

c^ooco'oT 

Hb OS CD kO 
rH OS CO rH 

rH rH OS 


O O CD 00 »0 CO ^ rH oo»oi 
CD »0 OSkO Hjk 00 »0 00 

CO CO OS CO OS OSOS OSb- 


COH#<CDrHCS»OCO»0 

Ht<OOCOOSOSkOb»OS 

OOCOkOOS'^’^OOrH 

oTcd CO bf r-T 00 bf »o' 

COrH OS 


b-OSi 

Scoj 

o*o1 


Ui 

o 


..=3^|gg-2S|§> 
^ 2? .© 


a 
o 

CO 

§ fl* 


1 

1 

1 1 1 1 
lilt 

© 

HH 

1 

till 

b» 

( 

1 

1 

1 1 I H 

: i il 

© 

◄ 

1 

1 

1 

, 

1 1 1 p 

t 1 I 'H 

CL 

Q 

1 

1 1 ! p 

A 

1 

1113 

< 

1 

o 

: : :w 

1 1 ' 

A 

a 

P 

I'a : a 

H 

O 

j 

• s ®'a 


P 

§'S*S 

a 


'o 9 2 wj 
• «2 H a M 

0 


r 

CO 

o 


o 

u 

CO 

. 

o o 


OS *0 

> fl g 


rH "S O H C3 

bfl'd ^ o So a 

6s'S«ag'2a“g« 


c3| 

al 

oi 

V 

06 


H 

tH 


Jh 

> 


13 

o 


O « 03 08 c6gs..';i®® 

J O CQ CQ OQ g 5)43 *5 CQ ^ 
o£5| 




2 


♦H ^ 

■§ 

r 1 

-dS -3 

Ipfi* 

_os^ bo 

® £ £ ^ o'^S 

*S n Pop 

^ wSf spa o,g 

'O 3 a 3 Q. © ® 

a H O O Im 

P *-< u ® 

O 

. *H L- 

2 03 a 

a 3 ‘ 


o 

CO 


fl 

i| 

o o 


a g Bp 

■sill 

03 3 a 3 

S O o 

iaa 




o 


'S’ 

a 

a- 


a 

2 

bfl 

o 

Ih 

o. 

© 

© 

IH 


a 

© 

.a 

o3 

p 

o 

•*■» 

o 

a 

03 

-1^ 

03 

Xi 

© 

o 

p 

CO 

© 


d 

3 S 

B 

.§S°®£”.|- 3 | 

m , . >5 1. a 

- _-2S g g 

3 ^ crt a rr 


© 


w . - - 
© o 

5 3' 

^ 

^ A ^ ^ M 


© © p 

■«tl3 

o +j ©.Sf 

as s 

M 
© 


u 

© 

-M 

o 

b 

o 

•fH 

g 


© 

*© 

u 

p 

© 

A 

3 

bO 

Pm 


08 

© 

u 

p 


p 

3 

g 

© 

a 

o 

o 

*» 

p 

© 

'd 

© 

p 

•r4 

CO 

a 

© 


© 

p 

o 

'O 

p 

C6 


p 

© 

a 

a 


p .... 

S'd 3 
© o* 

— a oT 
'^'S'3 

•h qj 
© -H 

u 03 

© 


(m 

a 


© 

© 

© 


'd<* 
© ^ 
TJ 


a 


rH ^ 

CL a 

i!- 

o ©.2 
•aba 

0) © 
XI g*H 

o a ■« 

*H O 

^ o ^ 

d-SI 

as 3 


© 
. t-t 


'V 

© 

© 

p 


CO 

•«-H 

CO 

© 

p 

a 

o 

•d 

© 

t-« 

© 

.a 

a 

'd 

© 

CO 

fl 


CO'3 
QJ K» 

*5? O 

2'a 

p © 

® CO 

'd a 

© o 

>*£ 
o S 

aO* 

a's 
© 

a ^ 

§.9 

”S 

a © 

*H Lj 

CO 

tuo 0) 

ri 

p © 

a •'a 
Sg 

o'" 

©■^ 

CO O 

p p 

a ® 

M «3^ 
g ©Ph 

03 bo _ 
H> to 


3 

£ 

© 

kS 

'd 

p 

© 

•d 

Ut 

© 

o 

« 


© 

© 

CQ 


S o 


a 9* rt © P 


© 


© 

•k^ 

a p 
© >• 

CO O 
P-M 

2'a _ 

'H ® 


p 

o 


© 
CO 

l-S 


£-“>m 

^ 'O CO 0) 

(D - 


■H ia 
© © 

©CO © 

•H a ^ 'a 

Q.3 ®-9 a 


J3 © 

o 


-3 gda 

a -3 
05 a 

© ^^3 

o ^ 


©' 


CO 


p 

CL © 

■•3 rH s J2 

p ^p^ 
p ® 


tH H *2 

© 3 © 


a to 

3 

© CO 
U OS 

® a 


a^^ bija 


o 
^p 


H'© © 3 

H 03 III ., || 


a 03 

^.a 

Clift'S I iis 

"5" 1"^ “**" oo 


CO § 

©'3 „ 

© a © 


o 

p 


2’9 « 

fe a Hs 

Ohh cq 


© 

o 

CQ 

© 

p 

HH 

>» 

X 

T? . 
§► « 

•p 

si 

^CQ 

a^ 

X.2 

- © 


w a 

p bA 

1-9 

U p 

.SB 

CO .2 
© -4^ 




e 

k. 

e 

z 

k 

s 

CO 

s 

Q 

k 

be 

0 

k 

a. 

k 

0 

z 

s 

•k* 

S' 

k 

"C 

s 

z 

*5 

be 

e 

•M 

£ 

k 

"Q 

z 

z 

c 

o 

4L 

so 

•pH 

CO 

CO 

Q 

b) 

•w 

Q 

•pH 

k 

a. 

z 

z 

•pH 

PHH 

•c 

z 

a, 

4L 

z 

0 


I 

CO 

i 

o 

4^ 

pC 

d 

H 


CO 

X 

p 

a 

v-< 

© 
• pH 

X 

a 

a 


© «0 

•ca 

(55 


b- 

«k 

eo 

b- 

eo 

o 

rH 

4^ 


COrHOS«CS 00 00 CD lO CS (JO O cs o OCS <D CO 

OSb-rHiO-^Jk COCSOOSOb^OSCCt'»OOSO> CD 

OOSrHrHCS OO OS 00 b-CO OS OO CD 00 CO CO 

OCObTOkO kO oTo COC^'PjTiOrH kCpH OObT eo 

e0»0 kOrH ^CO'^ rHCSCO iHCSCS^« b* 

rH OS 


© 

© 

p 

© 

CO 

• pH 

CO 

CO 

© 

© 

• pH 
rH 

X 

a 

a 


CO 

© 

a 

>» 


© 

»ph 

© 

© 

a 

CO 



■kCk 

© 

■k^k 

CS 

X 



CS 


'OP 

oT 

<1 



OHkCOHkOS »0 CD kO rH OS CS b-Hk CS Hk b» 
IOCOH4CD00 OoOb-OSrHOSb-CSrHOSCSOO 
kOb»k0^40 OkCOSOOSCOOSCSOoOCOCO 


S3 

bs 


b-rHrHOfkO ^kOO O CD O OOCO of rH rHOS b?” 

rH ^ pH O ^ ^ rH ^ ^ 

rH 


a p 

o © S 

*^'d iL 

'3 0 2 

< §3 
© © 
•d 


b- 

CO 

CD 

CD 

Hk 

CO 

s 


COrHOHkHk rHCOkrtcOCDOOOOOOCCCDCSb- 
COOSCOCOb- Hk bs CO kO 00 kO O OS CO CO OS b* 
kOb-COOCD CObHHkCOb-CS(3SOSHkCOOSOS 

ko'^bfeocs' ^COrHFj’cfcDOCOkOHk'oTbT 
OOOOCOOSkO QOOSkObrOOCOOOkOOOOHk 
OrHbSrH rH pH rH pH CS CO 

CO* 


CO 

b- 


© 

© © 
Mp 
© © 
-dto 

?? *co 
V CO 

© 


CS 

OS 

*o 

kO 

Os 




00 PHb» >oOS 
H< pH kO rH CO 

oost^oso 

oTPH 00 bfcT 

CS b- 40 ’•Jk Tjk 
Hk CD rH CO CS 


kCrHrHCSb.C0kO4OWC0HkrH 

OSOOrHOOb-COpHCDCDrHb.00 

COOOCSCOOSOOCOCSOb»pHb- 

CDOTcfOHfr-I'OCO'rHOOHk'br 

pHCSb«iH4DHkHkOSb»CO'n4aS 

Hib,»ot-»OOOOSCOOSCSOPH 

kO* pH rH 


b» 

OS 

CS 

br 


© 

o 

Eh 


CO 

Hk 

CD 

CD 

kO 

o 

kO 

CS 


p-H CD O CO kO pH o rH CD CS CO O b-00 CO O kO 
COCOCOrHOS Hk(3>cSCSCOHkOOOrHt^OSHt4 
rHHjPtOtOCS OrHCDOOCDHkCSHkkDOOHkpH 

cs^’koefcood' od'oTHirrHHk"oO*' 0 'Ood'Hk‘kO>D 

CSCDOSkDO HkCOb.b.COCOOOOOCOHf4Ht4»o 
kOb-rHb-CO kOOOOOOOCDOOHkpHCOCOkO 

00 pH iH pH pH iH 


CS 

CO 

00 

CO 

00 

OS 


© 

© 

'd 

© 

Pm 


Vi 


o tuD 

'd o 


p 

a 


a 


CO M 
bC tH 

a g 
*a^ 
© 
p^ 


O'OCLi 
® ©^ 


P c6p^ 


CD 

CS 

kD 

br 

kO 

CO 

CS 

kO 


COOkOrHb- kOCDCOkDb.QCOkOOsCSCSCS 
CSHkCOeOOO kOCO'kj40b-OHkOSb-b-b-CO 
COiHCDOCD kOCOOCSCSHkCDHkOOOOOCO 


Hk pH OS CO 

b- O pH b. o 

O rH io kO b- 


■•Ck’^rHb.COCSCOcDCSrHOrH 

OSkOCOCSb.OOOOb.rHCSOO 

COpHCOkOOOSkOkOkDCOCDOS 


00 

kO 

b. 

cf 

o 

b. 


kO 


pH pH CS 


Vi 

1 

t 

M •*» 

1 

tH H 

1 

0 P 

1 

^g 

1 

1 

rr tlX> 

a3 0 

1 

1 

> tH 

T 

1 

•F-* r\. 

0 ^ 

( 

1 

1 


© 

© 

tH 

© 

tH 

© 

a 

© 

o 


© 

£ 

M 

tH 

o 


-4^ .r 

1 

1 

• 

1 

1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 

1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 t I 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

© k^H 

1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 

© © 

1 

1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 

Q£ 

1 

I 

1 

1 

1 

1 

I1IIP lllll 

1 1 i 1 1 lllll 
lllll lllll 
lllll lllll 


© 

■4^ 

o 

e 


b- 

CO 

■kC 

CO 

c< 

CO 

CO 

00 

es 


kOOOOSCS 
rH 00 pH CD CO 
brb. 00 


•^CSCOOO-^rHkOrHCDOCSCS 

OSCDOOSkOCOkO^Hj^OSiOCO 

OOOOOSkfjCOb-kOOOOOCIkO 


PH CS CS OS CD 
CO PH IC CS 
iOpHrHOOCS 


COOOCSb«OrH40CO-kCkt>. 
. 00 CO OS 00 b-CO C^ CD b- 

CD'kkt'OOS'^brS'kCktocOrHkO 


s 


kO 

b. 


OS 

•tf* 

00 


kO 


© 

o 

H 


CD 

CO 

■kstk 

s 

b- 


o 

rH 

se¬ 


es CD ko CO 

CD »0 b» pH iH 
pH CO CD kO 

od'osoTcf 00* 

kOOrHOSCO 
pH O 00 rH CS 

cfco eo PH 


S iOOOSCO'^OOCOCOkO'^OS 
OSb-CSrHb-OSCS-^JkCOpHCO 
COkO^^OkOrnkOkOCSOOCDO 

pHCDcd'ocood'Tjk'od'brcfo'^ 

"iCkbrCD'-^kOCOCDCO'kCkoOCOpH 

CD^CSCOrHbrCSkOCOOSrHpH 


gescocoes coco 


pH CO ""Sk »0 


.9 ® 

p 

X ® ^ 

a > w 

aC-d 

rH ap 

©— 3 

p p 

0H © 


o 

CD 


CO 


b* 

o 




Is, t-i*,H CD 
CDC10Sb.kO 
CS CO O CD 


CO CO CS CO 
CDCS p^ kO 
PH 00 CS CS 


88 


CS CO CO pH 


OOCOCD-^kOCSOOkOCOkCCDkD 

CSCSb-eSpHkOOOkDrHOSCOCO 

kO»OCSOOOOpHHt4pHb-CDOS4D 

bfcDbTcd'kQ'cooocf'^od'pH 

iDiHO'^CkCDCOO'^CDOkOCD 

kO*DCOeOpHb-CO»OCOOpHpH 

O cf CO CO CS*" CO CO IH CO rH hF kO 

CO 


fl «8 

H aD 

o 2. 

« «3 

.£:© 

•dx 

.2 5 
a's 

«s 

o © 

0-2 

CQ 


© 

•4-» 

o 


a 

'A 

◄ 

p 

o 

A 


tH 

o 

a 


■Sap.. 

2 ” 

'g-c ©-^-^ 


tH © 


8 

p 


-d 

tH 

.o 


t> 

o 

tH 

a 


2tH 
© 


^ 2 
a © 
^ © 
p a 

p 

o 

o 


2 aato 

b£ © 

a © 


P S g 

SS(5Woig||sSd :g(q 

bflkH Cl a O rH »“ rH tn © p '3 I. T~ i-J W 

.'2'g ^ I •••§ s ® ^ ^ S,® o 

^©©©^^otH©©©o L® P a^ 

© © 


-d 

p 

© 

w 


© 

'd 

o 

X 

Ps 


155 


452436°—42 


11 


dence..1 5,609,128 1 5,635,765 

See footnotes at end of table. 
































































































































































Table D-3 .—Amount of public and private assistance and earnings under specified Federal work prograniSy by urban area, 1940 —Continued 


•r- fl 


o 

a 

CQ 

•«-» 

CO 

(O 

CO 

03 

o 

•t-- 

D 

a 


CO 

« 

a 


03 

o 

c; 

Q. 

CQ 


tN. o »«c o> »c at 
O O Ci •-< O CO ^ Q ' 

OS CO 00 io CO o 


c^c^r*os»cc^o>t^**^Qco 

»-^t>.cocot>.oo»ococo«'“ 

COOCO’^OSOOCOOCSt^ 


SOCOC'* <0 CO CD OO O 

CSCD 40 ^ 
i-H m 

C4 


OOO COCOOSt^^OS 

^ 0> 1—• ^ ^ 


00 O 
c5 CO 
CO 

r-TioT 

1-1 

o 


O O OS 40 
CO O 40 O 40 
1-H 00t>* CD 

o rj^crTco'* c<r 

i-< CO 1-* 


or^ 

ca 

^ CO 


40 <o 

coosoo 
os oo> 


l-H X 


^ OC t*“ M* 
COO^I-^ — 
CO^ 00 CD CO 

»o c^tD 
os 


C<IOCO 
CO oo ^ 
1-^ OS CO 

•> Ak •» 

CD CO QO 
40 GO 40 



CD 40 i-« 

X C0 40 
OOOSOOt^ 


:3L 

CO oEicd 




o 

5-0 

o.S 



CD’-40400S400Si-<t»» 
t>- OS OS CO »0 CD OS 
X*^ C^CDCOOO'^OS 


'^CDOOCDCDCOOSCDcOcoOJ 
OSt^OSOSCOC*-i-<COC^CO‘0 
401—iOSCOC^4Ot>-<N»O06OS 


OS 


OS i-< ^ »0 ^ 40 
O CO 1-N 


,-r,-M 40 0100 
t'* 00 CD OS OS 


K •. «« 

. Q CD ^ C- 
lOSOi-'COOO 
X 


coos 

OCD 

CO 

coco 

CO 


OSOCOt'-CD 
1-^ X O 00 00 
CD X OS 40 

odcD oTof 40 

^ ^ d 


oo o 

OS CD 
CD CD 

00 ^ 


CD CD CO 
X O 40 
O CD 

d»-«d 


t«-40Xt^X 

os 40 CD 

O TJ4 t«. X »0 

O CD 00 os'CD 

CD *-H 


X O X 
TJ< X 40 
1-H X 

CO t>ros 
X CD X 


CO X X 
OS O d 
t^h-X 

CD 00 oT 

^Xd 


4OX0SXd 
CD X O » »0 
'Tj* 1-* X o d 

»-^‘c0 0 4C5CO 
ddcDor^ 


^ o a 

O ^ 

fl [O 

< aja 
o o 


^CDOS X OSX CD d 

XOX 00 X 1—40 40 X d OS 
x^x OS •'C440 !>-^ d 


xdosxt^dist'xoxos 

g XOsOsXt'-Tt4CDQ^t^ 
t^-^^XdXt^OXCD 


1-1 CD 
X I-I 


CD0SX40'i**i-hC^X-H 
CD40000SOS40 40X 
b* 1 -H X Tf< d ^ d 

CO* 


4O0Si-«’^t^i-'d4O0S^*-( 

xr'-40xosasxcDX4ox 

i-^dt-4ddxd’Tj4»-ixx 

40 Cl 


X 

© 

© 



o 

o 


X 


© 

X 

X 

X 

d 



d 

mM 

© 

o 



© 


t- 

Tt* 

© 

•iJ< 

© 


© 

X 

X 


© 


X 

o 

X 

-•f 

© 

Q 

»o 

X 

o 

Q 

X 

© 

o 

r-- 

© 

s 

© 

© 

X 

© 

tM 

X 

o 

l>- 

X 


© 

t-M 

X 

t-M 

© 


© 


d 

© 

o 


X 

© 


© 

© 

CD 

d 

CD 

CD 


© 

X 

X 

CO 

d" 

d’ 

© 

© 


■h 

X 

X 

r^ 

40 

CO 


OS 

© 

X 

CO 

d 

s 

X 

d 


40 

© 

rf< 

© 


40 

X 

© 

d 

Tf* 

»*H 

X 

o 


X 

© 

X 

X 

X 

© 

© 


X 

© 

d 

d 

X 

d 

d 



d 

o 

X 

X 

X 

d 


© 

X 

d 

t-l* 





d 




a 
o o 
ua 
ca a 
JL 

T3 w 

O *^ 

CO 

cs 


© X t^ 
d 

* 1 #* d ^ 

X©©Xl^t^X©X 

©©^dr«-d’'»'X© 

OlMMfMTflOl-'l-HXX 

OXX'^©d©OHj<tM© 

©o©t^od©xdxx 

x©d©ot>-t'''^dt-M© 

t-M mH 

© r>* 
X d 

©d 1 -H X X 
© © © CS © 
O © d d 

Hf d 
© © 
X X 

© d 

© H?* 

i-H © X 

© © © X d 
X © © © 
t-i-Ht-'^X 

Hfi -ij* r^ 
O X d 

©ox 

© X X 
X © © 

rH mH ^H 

©©xr^^ 
© -^ X © © 

-Tfi X X © hH 

x'‘cdcd' 

d ^ 

X d 

oTb-rcsfcDOTco'd'O'h^ 

©©©©ot^^c^-^ 

dXi-*di-i'^©Xd 

X* o'd *'0 i-T 04 “O O CD CO CD 
X© 0 ^drl 4 ddi-<'^r- 
dxx*^©-^©Tj 4 ©x© 

1 -M ^ 

d © 
X © 

© CD CD 40 CO 
Q CO d X X 
© 40 © -^ © 

X ©*■ 
X © 
^ © 

iCr>r-H!jr 
X d d 
X d © 

cTcO'^d 40 
t>- H }1 CO © ^ 
© © d © X 

1 -H O CO 
Hf X d 
d Tj* X 

S 2 S 

ot^o 

OS d CD t^x 

do©do 
O 1 -H o d 


Vs *4 *4 

1 -H X 1 ^ 

40 “ 

Vs 

Htfl 

•s 

Vs 


d hH 

f-M X ^ 

d d *-H 

i^'^d CO d 


eO 

o 


X CD 

OS lit* 

X c- o 

»> 

OS X 
40 OS 
CD 40 X 

*e- ^ 


ls,^X 040 CDOdd 
XCDl—<’i»‘X»-4^dTj4 
0040'^Xt^l^t^CD 


t>.CD40Xdt'-d'^O40O 
Tf4CD0SCDXCDXX40cDt^ 
05X^^4O0S4OX’^^^0S1—I 


CDXi-Hi—t40 X 40X'^ 
XOcOXOOS^XX 
d^d40dCSd40'i!j4 


Oi-iOSt^CD^i—'Xi-HdcD 
0S40-HXi~4dO’^dX^ 
^l>.40t'.OOS^XXXO 


d 


d 

X 


d X 


d 


X 

© 

X 

X 

X 

S2 

o 

H|< 

X 

X 

o 

r- 

s 

HI* 

X 

X 

o 

o 

d 

h- 

O 

Hi* 

o 

d 

X 

s 

© 

d 

© 

© 

© 

X 

d 

?? 

d 

d 

© 

X 

Hj* 

X 

© 

© 

© 

© 


Ht* 


^ © 

X 

© 


Tf4 

© 

X 

X 

© 

© 

o 

X 


X 

© 

© 

Hj* 

d 

© 

t- 


© 


X 

d 

o 


cT^-T 

tC 

«4 

r>. 

40 

o 



x 

CD 

Vs 

X 

Vs 

© 

v^ 

o 

d 

d‘ 

40 

nf 

Vs 

o 

CO 

OS 

©*■ 

V4 

X 

40 

V4 

d 

o 

© 

o 

MH © 

HI* 

© 

© 

CO 

© 

X 

r- 

hM 

© 

X 

o 

hM 


© 

© 

O 

Hj* 

o 


© 

X 

X 



© 

X 

X © 

h- 

© 

d 

CD 

© 

X 


o 

© 

© 

© 

© 



© 

Hi* 

© 

© 

d 

d 

© 

X 

© 

CD 



Vs 

d 



Vs 





Vs 

t*. 





rH 

Hj* 


d 

X 



VH 

d 


d 


CO 

*0 

a 

3 

s 

Ph 


ca 

u 

o 

la 

* cc 

5r? 

^ bO 

'O o 

3 Cl 
t£ U 

G 9 
w 


eo*^<4 

O'CCu 
<D cjr 

p 03f> 

*- --v 

a.n 

o 


X 

o 

© 

■"«* 

Ht* 

© 

© 



© 

© 

X 

t-M 

X 

© 

X 

X 

d 

o 


o 

© 

X 


© 

X 

o 

o 

r- 

d 

X 

© 

X 


© 

Q 

d 

© 

© 

© 

© 


Ht* 

© 

Ht* 

© 

© 


X 

© 


r-M 

H^* 

Ht* 




S' 


CD 

© 


© 

X 

© 

X 

X 

© 


i>- 


X 

o 

o 


© 

© 

d 

© 

© 


© 

wM 

© 

X 

X 

© 


o 

X 


o 

X 

t-M 

o 


d 

X 

© 


d 


© 

d 

O 

9^ 

CD 

© 

X 

© 

© 

tH. 

© 

X 

X 

Hi* 


© 

Hf 

© 

Ht* 

© 

o 

© 

X 

o 


Ht* 

© 

Hf* 

X 

© 

© 

X 


!>- 


X 

o 

9^ 

© 

X 


© 

X 

X 

X 

X 

tH. 



!>• 


rM 


oT 

h«s 

O 

© 

Q 

Ht* 

o 

© 

© 

© 




r*- 

X 

© 

cf: 

X 

© 

fH. 

40 


© 

d 

Ht* 

h-s 

d 

© 

d 

r>* 

© 

© 

X 

© 


X 

X 




© 

r- 

© 

X 

© 

o 


© 


© 


o 

© 

© 

© 

© 

© 

X 

© 



© 

d 


i>. 



Ht* 

© 


X 

d 

o 


o 

© 

X 

t>- 



CD 


© 

CD 

Ht* 

tH. 

Pm 

X 

© 

© 

X 

© 


© 

© 

© 




d 

X 

d 


© 

tM 


© 

d 

© 

© 

© 


HI* 


© 

© 


Ht* 

© 

Ht* 

o 

X 

o 

© 

o 

X 

H^* 

© 

© 

o 

r- 

O 


O 

O 

d 


r- 

Ht* 

o 

X 

d 

© 


© 

© 


X 

o 


o 

Vs 

©*■ 

V4 




x" 


•k 

Vs 


Vk 


d" 


wM 

V 

d' 

©" 

CD 

X* 

HP 

CD 

©‘ 

d 




^4 

d 

X 


d 



d 

d 

d 



X 

r-M 

X 

© 

o 

X 

© 

d 

© 









X 













rH 




Ht* 












d 
















CO 

'^'1 

2 

^ feb 
o 


OS 

3 

u 

3 

Im 

o 

a 

o 

o 


44 

oS 


•t-Si* 

o ^ 

a> 


«s 

o 


X X ''tf* 
CD *0 
X't* 


X OS O 40 OS d 
CD r- 40 X 
O d d X 40 1-H 



t^xr^osdXb'b'X 

b-cDI^»OQdXXX 

n^i-HOXCD^sOt^d 


X 


d 


^ d 


o©x©©©©ddxt^ 

XX©Hi*XXt^©©Hf*d 

H|*©MHXHt*Ht-CO©t>-»-HX 

X d 
© © 

© -H 

© X © X © 
1-H Ht* CO ©X 
X d © t- X 

Ht* © 

X X 

Ht* © 

© X X 

© © 0 

X d 

0 1-H © 1-H mH 

^ d X d d 
X © © © © 

X X ^ 
© © r^ 

Hf* (H. © 

© mH •—* 

2S2 

© d © © GO 
© © 0 © 40 
© © © X Ch 

os'i-Hoo©ort^cDd'co'd'ccr 

Xdd©l>-©XX-Ht-.© 

d©XXtH.tHsHf*XtH,Xl-H 

t>^© 
© ^ 
©© 

© Ht* d CD 
© CO 40 b* X 
©COi-H©X 

oTo 

d X 
©tH* 

Ht* OS © 

© X d 

x^x 

^ CD 1-H 40 CD 

© pM mH © ^ 
t-HVtHiXd 

cDdt>^ 
© X 1 ^ 
©© © 

Vs Vk Vs 

tH. X d 
© © X 
0©d 

d X 

^ s-T ■^" 40 ' 

CO 

Vk 



Vs 

© 

*-*cod 

Vs Vk 

l-T dtH^I-T 


flS 

o 

9^ 


X—< 40 
X OS 

»o 

•^jfcDX*' 
OS 
X 


OS ® 

^ s 


t«-I^«040dOSCDd 

dX-^t^OSdOSOOS 

OSOSXi-Ht>»X’^XOS 

QcD-^dddXXX 

XCDOSOt^40COOSX 

XOO»-H©CD494t^X 


^©XcDi-<^XXdX 40 

,-(Osx'^cD©r^©x^o 

X©C-40X©'-'©40©X 

^^Or^oToOCD't^’^CSfoQ 

’^O^XX©Xb»40©d 

d'^40©400i-<rH40Xd 


X l-H 


^ 40 ^ 1-H 40 ^ d 

i-t a 


dxddX’i»<X’4j4'^©x 
^X ^ i-« 


pM© 

XCO 

OX 

tH. © © © © 
© Hp X © © 

© X 0 HP 0 

0 Hp 

i-> d 
© © 

© 1-1 © 
t". X © 
^ X ^ 

0Q©©0 
X 0 © X 0 

© © © d HP 

X © ^ 
© X X 
X »-* © 

©X© 
0 X X 
^ X 1-H 

hPPm©X^ 
X x-^ d 

IV* HP X CO pH 

•^HP 
t-M © 

xd 

X oTd © i-T 

© Q 0 © © 

d © X X X 

rH.’'x 
© d 
X HP 

d CO p-T 

0 X © 

1-H © © 

eo40tHr©-^ 
P- 1-H pM 05 t- 

o©c>©x 

»o tHToT 

HP pM © 
©XP- 

or40 oT 

1-* CD d 
ddpH 

© © CO ^00 
1-H X X © Ph 

xo©©x 

HP CO 
© 

CO d x d CO 

40 d 

cOi-Td 

oTco © d i-T 
X 

pTio t>r 

fH 

Vs Vs ^ 

© © © 

oThp i-Td X 

1-H X 


.2 © 

-t-s 

a > oo 

Oi ix'O 

^ aa 

^ vi 

o a 

^ 03 


X »0 *4^4 
X Tf4 »0 
i-i d 

•» «1. 

8 X ^ 
© d 

^ o 


OS «4J< X 
^ © 40 
X 

40 X 
X d 


X X X i-H 1-^ 
'X©Od^ 
©CD©©© 

» •k «4 

© © © © »-H 'nr 
© X © 1-4 d © 
©©©©XX 


CDi-H©©©©t^©XXX 

dt'»t'»xx'«f»'XO’'*'©© 

•^©©©xx©©x©d 

*4 *4 ^ *4 •* •• 

©xx©©d'^i^x'^oo 

©©d©’'»>©x©©x'3| 

d^©t^©i-«©X©'^d 


X ' 


d 


,-H©»-l©l-Ht'»©T-td 
1-H © 


dxddx*^xi4f^ox 

^ X ^ 


© CD 
cO 

0 

© © © HP © 
© HP X Ph d 
l-Ht-HXXP- 

©mH 
Pm -fP 

0 d 

X © d 
I-H d X 
^ ^ ^ 

1-1 00 X X© 

HP 0 MM lO ^ 

X © © X tH. 

© © ^ 
d MM up 
© 1-H X 

© © © 
So © X 

d©Hp 

© d pH © © 

d XX X © 
X X X X HP 

© s 

X X 

oTtp Xd Ht*" 
0 X X © © 
X © X © "^ 

oTt-r 
Q X 

Vk ^ Vs 

pH t>- © 

© •^ pH 

rH © © 

Vk Vs Vs Vs Vk 

© X HP p* mM 
©1^X©X 

d © © © So 

di-HP— 
CD © d 
© HP X 

CD-^OS 
X mH X 

x©x 

© CO eooTd 
© X 1-H © © 
X © 1-H 0 © 

»0 CO 
© 

CO d Xdco 

©d 

Vs, Vs Vs 

X 1-H d 

Vs Vs » Vs Vs 

© X © d mh 
X 

pTio pT 
mH 

oTco 40 

oTV^d cox 

MH X 


a c® 

9 © 

O w 
e/5 ^ 

> s 

O.'S 

«s 

to - 

o © 

o5 

OQ 


H 

IJ 

H 


CA 


,2 

2 ‘a 

o ^ 


» ^ ® iS 


p 

p 


2 © 


© 


a R csi£ 

®tS£ a 


o o 


o 

ce © 
txJ2 
© 
= o 


o 

CA 

a 

o 

eC 

1 m- 

>4. 


o3 


a 

o3 

> 


a 

o 


CO 
Im 
Qj 


a 

<D 

2^3 

a o 
oS 


Im 

a> 


to 




!5 


ce 

. 

O OS 3 ri 
** Ta o ^ 

CO ■ S c 

Qj .© y 33 ■4-» o3 ce 

a 

© 

04 


© 

Im 

ce 


cm 


t 

CO 

© 

M 




i4 

H 

Iz; 

u 

o 

a 

H 

Oh 

o 

iz; 


2 

Sf bo 

S.s •• 

• • *• - cB 

aa 

oOm S 

.a •B 

sa a 


ff) CO © 

,2 So G 3 

>1 t«w 

§J= ® 

a H^.a -4^ Im 

>a’2g® 

w^w(»a- 



156 
























































































































































l.'b 4-4 H«J1 0 
00 CO 1“^ 1-H 
(H* f-4 05 CO 

oi^or^ 

1-H 0 00 ^ 

Q»0 05 
^ uo b4 
00 1-4 CO 

b- 

•H 

o* 

OOtPPJ-^ 
b- »C 0 05 
05 Tt* 0 

MbOObr* 
COtPOO 
^ 05 O* 

lb-*04H05 
ICO 05 CO »C 
IOCD05 00 

1 

05 

05 

00 

1 CO CO 

1 t"- 44 
ITP 50 

CO 50 CD CO 
CO -P 50 1-H 05 
»0 05 0 50 

C5 50 1 

r>-C5 1 

0500 1 

s 

*OtT.00O5b»00CO00 

4HC0b-c0bH-O0Q50 

00’^C50b-^?5ip 

00 • 

05 1 

CO I 

rH 

c<fc<rr^o> 

C5 

cb 

CO 

Tp- 

05 

0 06 t-" Tfl 

1-4 t- fr, b- 

iO 05 “ 

05 00 

f-H 4^ 

it'T 00 05 

• TP br 

1 

• 

• 

c 

1 

1 

t 

50 

11-H 05 
150 CO 

1 

t 

1 

I 

1 

1 

1 

1 

ooTp 5bTjror 

Tp tP 

CO 05 1 

1-H CD > 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

• 

1 

1 

tC 

odo5^i-HTP5beo'Tjr 

00c0C5i-H5OcOC5O5 

C5 •, 

05* 1 

50 « 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

• 

1 

iO 05 »0 05 
-H 4-1 C<5 05 
CO 00 05 C5 

CO 0 OC CO 

1-4 CO 00 

b^eo t 
05 -Ip • 
»-H CO * 

1 

00 

Tp 

00 

CO 0 CO 1 
44 C5 CO • 
COCO^ 1 

CO 0 CO 
00 CO tP 
CO 05 Ub 

1-105 05 i7<»0 
50 CO 05 CO 

005 CO 00 05 

CO 

00 

00 

TP coo 

CO 50 50 
1 -H TP 0 

1 1 1 t 1 

1 t 1 t 1 

1 1 1 1 t 

1 1 1 1 t 

50 C5 50 
CO CO 1-H 

TP 05 CD 

50 

00 

05 

COCOOOOOb4C'5C5FH 

b..COOOC5QOOcOC5 

C005COO^i-hOOO 

ss? 

50 0 

o»ooi'*H 

C0»-H»0'^ 

CO co'cs—r 

^ »-4 r"4 

C>^ ' 

«-H 1 

1 

1 

1 

< 

1 

1 

1 

CO 

CD 

b'^^o’co' « 
COC505 1 

1 

• 

1 

• 

• 

• 

t 

0^00 05 
CO »H 
f-H 

i-i tri lb 4 h' 50 
1-H *1 4H 44 CO 

o- 

oib-To 

CO CO 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

till! 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 t 

1 1 1 1 • 

• lilt 

1 1 1 1 1 


05 

or-HbNrTfri-H't-Todod 

b'-05 X 50l-H50 50l-l 
05 05 rH CO 

45 

0 c^r 

0 CO 

44 

r>. ^ 0 

Tp u5 CO 

0 t'- »o 0 

b- b- h- »o 

0 05 CO CO 

0 CO 'ip Tp 

CO 1-4 CO 
0^0 
*-H b-* 

iO 

05 

05 00 CO 00 

0 00 05 1 -H 
CO CO 0 05 

bn* tH ^ 
44 TP .H 
05 05 »-4 

OCDCDCOO 
1-4 05 Tp CO 0 
05 CO 00 Tb 50 

Or 

50 

0 

4H CO CD 
00 Tp 05 
05 05 4H 

1 1 1 1 

50 t 1 t 1 

50 1 1 1 i 

4H 1 1 1 1 

05 1 -H TP 
4H Tfl 05 

050CD 

4H 

b- 

00 

05C5b'-C00005000 

50Tf1b>-^1-Hi-Hts.C0 

C0l-HTP0>C050b»05 

1-4 05 

CO 0 

TP b- 

CO CO 05 
«0 50 05*1^5 

rH 14H ^ 

p^o^od' 

»-H CO 00 "Ip 
C5COC^C'l 

0 CO"h^ 

05 05 
05 1-4 

t- 

44 

TP 

cb TP W5 CO 
0 CO -H CO 
^ ^ 05 ^ 

ic 05''cf 
^ 0 

05 05 CO 

TP~ 4-r 05" 50 tP 

b^05goo^ 

50 

00 05 50 
TP 0 05 
05 CO CO 

05 1 1 1 1 

till 
115 1 

Q b-^TjT 
50 b- 0^5 

br 

odeb<ood‘cbcoc5'c5‘ 

OC'55O00b-0005»D 

00COC5eO<DCDC55O 

i>ro5 

Hp 1-H 
tP 05 










1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 5 

1 I 1 1 

1 1 1 1 

• 1 1 1 

till 



C5 


00 05 05 CO 
05 ^ rp 

4p COCO CO 

05 CD bn-CO 

CO CO CO 00 

00 05 CO 00 

05 CO 0 
0 00 t>. 
TP CO 00 

00 

05 

CO 

05 TP CO 05 
05 CO *C 05 
b-Tp »0 05 

eoo5b^ 

50 Tp b4 

00 44 tP 

05 05 05 44 CO 
Tp 05 05 CO 00 
0 05 CO 0 00 

CO 

CO 

05 

Tp 50 CO 
»-H 05 00 
1 -< 0 *0 

O- 1-H CO CO CO 
CO CO 05 CO tP 

b-. K 50 50 0 

CO 0 CO 
50 1-H CO 
CD bH* Th 

tP 

CO 

b» 

05b405050i-HbT50 

b-i-Hb-TpcOOC550 

C0OOC5c0O500b- 

CO i-< 

CO CO 

00 50 

^ Q 1-H CO 
05 0 00 uo 
to CO CO CO 

CO ^ 0 "’^ 

CO 05 0^5 CO 

co^ooco 

05*'OtC 

CO 05 *-H 

05 05 

00 

05 

0 

CO 05 44 *-H 
Tp 4H 05 »0 
•OtPCQtP 

1-4 inToo' 
CO 44 ub 
00 05 05 

cbo^Oio'ib 

CO 1-H Q b- 50 
4HC5C5 i-^ 0 

oT 

0 

4H 

CQ't-H^of 

4H 4H ^5 

05 CD 50 

CO Ip of 05"CO 
00 1 -H 1 -H Qoo 

C5 b-Too 
05 CO 50 

4H 

b-T 

CO 

4H 

o'O' 0 CO 00 00 “ 05* 05*' 
COCOGOCOb^OOTPCO 
’^b-5OC005c00505 

'p'co 

b- 05 

00 4H 

^ «-4 

of 




4H 







CO CO 1 -H CO'^T^r r-T I-T 
05 

ofi-T 


0 50 tP 05 
TP 00 05 05 
1-4 4H 0 05 

CDt>.TpC5 

CO CO 50 QO 

0 05 05 t- 

05 Q CD 
« T? b- 
CD b- »0 

4H 

0 

0 

b- 05 50 0 

^H ^H 

b- 05 0 05 

coco Ip 
501-4 eo 

b-CO 4H 

CO 0 b- 00 
0 00 00 00 

CO b- 44 CO 

oTo'oo'cr 

00 CO 05 CO 
b^ 0-05 00 

C0*'05“‘tp''tp'‘ 

CO CO 1-4 05 

50 05 05 CD 

C<f50 icT 

Tp f4 TP 

50 4H CO 

of 

44 

50 

t-To o'50 
00 00 ® 00 
CD 50 50 3 

TP'od'r-r 
b- 05 05 
1-H Hp CD 

00*'i-h’' 05’‘05*' 
Tp 05 1-H b- 
05 CO CO 05 


tjT 


1*4 


of CO 



00 

CO 

05 44 05 
05 05 05 

05 1 -H CO CO CD 

© CO 05 
© OC' b- 


b-©TPcO©C5©Tp 

Tp© 

fH 

0 

TP CO 05 CO Tp 

0 ©Tpb- 00 ©©Tp 
Tb©05 05tH©©ib 

© Oi 

CD 

05 

05 Tt* 00 

05 b- »C *0 0 

© © © 

© 

00 05 

10 

§ 

CO »-H b- 

50 TP C5‘ C5 cb 

Tp b-‘ 00 
00 ICOO 

*« 

Oi 

o6'odTPorTti5b'cbT*r 

of 44 

CO 

b- 50 50 

05 44 4H 0 00 

4H 

t4'P050© 05 05cO 
O5CD©©©i-H^05 

05 -P 

CO 

4H 

Tp 05 00 

O5^b-O0b- 

1-H 05 

05 

P P 

44 






w 1-7 CO 50 © of 1 -H 

CO 

•s » 

COi-< 


© b- P b- 

© 00 CO 44 
b- © P © 

CO tP P © 
b- CO © © 
t 4 05 © p 

ooco P 
cc © 00 

00 i-< © 

© 

© 

ipH 

05© ©P 
© 05 © © 
©CO b- 00 

05©P 
P 0 © 
CO © CO 

1-H © 00 © © 
l-H p © P © 
© © © *4 p 

0 

t— 

© 

©©© 
P © © 
b- 1-H © 

P P © b- br 

Q©i-H©b4 

© © © P © 

© 05 © 
CO 05 P 
CO © © 

© 

cfbCiooo 

© 05 1-H tN. 
© © © © 

cTtp'^^co’ 

© b- © 05 
© © © 00 

p^co of 

CO © © 
p eo CO 


b- i-H b- 

44 0 © © 
© © © CO 

&2S 

© 05 CO 

© CO i-f 0 cT 

© 05 © P 4H 

05©b-©© 

§ 

© 

©'4h’‘ of 
© b- p 
© p © 

bf of 00 cb CO 

© © P b- © 
© © © p © 

P*'cd'^ 
© b- 05 
© © 05 

0 

of ©of 

*4 44 

P 

P'i-h’i-T 

«k 

b« 

cf pof 

00 CO 

^ T-f P 

P 

p of 1 -H 

of ofcbof 

P 

P 


p b- © © 
05 © P © 

© 1-H p © 

© b4 p © 

© © © P 
© P © 44 

P 05 © 
© 05 © 
© © P 

© 

t-- 

P 

© © © © 
p b- 44 © 
© b- b- © 

P b*© 
P © © 
b. © P 

p p © p p 
05 b- P b- © 
b-Pb4p© 

© 

© 

© 

P 05 © 
b- © b- 
© © © 

orooccT© 

CO © 1-4 © 
1-4 44 © 

^hTp^ob 

© b- 05 b- 
»o P © P 

oop^br 

05PP 

© 

b- 

05 

© 

44 '©'of 50" 
b«b4 © © 

05 05 

Tt<‘cO‘5b 

P 1-H © 
© P © 

bTc 
© c 

5 CO©*'©*' 

0 © © b- 

p 

© 

COP"’^ 
© © © 

«s 

© 




of 






lO CO CO o 

00 o 

CO CO T-* CO 
05 CO CO 

^ 1-^ cs 


p 05 © 

b. 

© © P 

05 

© © © 

05 

^ 


b- b- © 

05 

P © 05 

© 


^t^^050i-<'^T}C 
COC^I—l^COC^COt^ 
lO00CC'cti»-HC^O5O5 

q" io" ’-^'co' cT 
r^cOc^^'^»-*cot^ 
C^COC4l'-»-t’^COCO 


Ot^rHC^OScOCOC^ 


^C0C005C0t^C^i-* 

r^ooco-^^ccicco 

C0’-HOC^CS05C0Tt< 

eoco'e'fcTbTcftCco 

0*-<C0051—1^050 
f-<»C'^C<IOOOOOOO 

odof i-Tco 1 - 1 ' 


CO CO 

00 o 

00 00 
CO 
CO CO 




CO 

t- 

<J> 


tjTo 

1 -H 

CO 


CO 05 W ^ 
O Q t- Q 

c^oo>o 

^cpoTcT 
^ uo lO 
00 1^05 05 

iS f-Todco 


40 00 CO 
05 CO 1 —* 1 ^ 

O f-H T»< 

O i-i'odco 
r* 05 05 cs 

o 05 1 -H o» 






P © © 
© © 05 
b- b- © 

© 

b. 

05 

to b- © b- 
© p © © 
b- © P P 

©©00 
© © © 
» © © 

© P b- b- © 
© © p © © 
© © © b- © 

© 

© 

© 

P P © 
05 P © 
© © p 

© © © © © 
05 p © P 
© b- © © b* 

Pb.© 
© © © 
© © 05 

b- 

© 

© 

©©ppp©©© 

p©©pb-©pb- 

©P©©©0©© 

©© 
© © 
©b- 

© 0 © 
tT.05 05 

0 © 0 


©' © 4-i © 
b- CO 05 © 
© © © 05 

©‘of© 

© © p 
© b- P 

© © P P © 
© 0 P p 05 
P « P P P 

©■ 

P 

0 

p'b^©" 
P © © 
P P © 

©'©" 05*44 © 
p © © P p 
b- © © © b- 

of 00 00 

© 05 © 
P p © 

© 

© 

p' 05"cd'© 05 05' o'cd' 
©05© 05 05©©P 

©©©©©© 0 © 

©*lo 

P 05 
0 P 

tffpof 

of 

© P © © 

P © 

P 

p P p P 05 

of 

05 © 05 

cd p © cd © 

pof 

fH 

©Tticdb^o6©’b^© 

© P P 

©P 


000i-ci!jc 
’Tf 05 i-« 

o rH 00 05 

^t^CO CO 
CO CO CO 00 
cot-05 05 

iOi-Todcd 


X0 05C50 
40 O *—* 05 
05 t- 05 40 

05'(jT 40*^40 
t^05 40 CO 
o 05 C5 05 


C9C4 


c« 


P © b- 

s © s 

0 

§ 

©POOP 
© b* 00 © 
<0 b- P P 

p © © 
b- 05 © 
© ©P 

©©t^©© 
© © © © © 
© © b- © © 

b- 

P 

05 

p b- © 
05 © P 
© © © 

P 05 © 05 © 

© © p © p 

0 © P P 05 

© 05 © 
© © © 
© p 05 

© 

© 

© 

0 ©‘© 

CO 05 © 

0 © © 

© 

© 

CO 

b^ 44 ©' 05~ 
© P © p 
©©©© 

05** ©"co' 
© © © 
P b» 05 

©“© p"of 00 

© p p © © 
P 05 p p P 

© 

© 

P © Tf 
p 0 b- 
p © © 

© © cd'© of 
© © © © © 
b- © b- © b- 

© 06 00 

p © © 
P P w 

g 

© 

ttfpof 

of 

CO P ©CO 

•»t of 

p p p P 05 

of 

of CO of 

COP CO coed' 

poi 



o 40 C5 o 00 001-^ r-a> 

CO CD CO CO 40 »0 

rf 40 eo O CO 05 C4 Tfi o t- 

cd‘i-i-^t^t>^t-T>J'od cTco 

OO CO 1 —t CO 1 -^ 00 CO 05 
00 00 CO 05 »HO O O Tf4 


05CO 05 05 r-»0 05'^ 

CO 1 -H 1 -H 




\Z S 

a 9-g 
9-is>S fe. 

_QpqS oj, 
g5 


C3' 

CO 


cO 
fl 

a 

o 

2^2*" 
o OT ® 

i|l?llili- 


6 ® 


fl 

o 

•4-5 

CO 

<1> 


® CO © 

S33 

aJ > D. > 

a-a 


Ih 

o 


^£gosssattxj.a«ls« s^tiSo^’c-ga^a 
2« a S .. eo^ 5 O g-g 0.2 o 
3 ^ gWSZ SQWfeWM-9;z;«P5-s w 

3 S 3 oO g g S' «.S 

Sz OcQ Eh &H > ? 


s|!s 


C] 

O 

•4-5 

d 


-CJ 

d 


d 

3 

K 


I 

« 2 9 

o‘£f 


^ ^ 
8§§ 
OUit^ 


d 

o 

4^ 

bO 

a 


g 

M 

u 

PW 


s 

s 

z 

D 

O 


eo 

© 

*© 


O 
© 
CO 

ti) d 


I 

I 

I 

>4 


> d ® 


Jf'S rt ^ « 

.. d d d*^ 4- 


S © fl 

O ^ o3 c3 c3 


M 

g’S'S 

© 4-5 "4 

(5 

O 4-5 
73 •tHJ 


cS 


.29 




biC 

o w w w g a ..’S ©^ 

ghJOcQCQCG g g^-gooE-' 
® o3 

CO o 

o 



-•v © -4^ ® 00 3 

S5>'c“7S 
cts o 3 <i<d 

3 55 © 'C^ w ©'d I 

«.o d.!» a^2 ea 

CO c3 ©^ 3,d g-: 




© & rt 

xi © 

w .- -- 

3 2 co^-d 
•d^ ©^ rt 

4-5 » 3 

.M d 4-5 •^4^4 

rtCQ m.2 
; -4-5 a.S 


© .^5.2 ^ 4- 

-d — o CO 
^2*^ Dh© 25 

--g£S£ 


© 

CO 

2 ©-p*- 

4-5,0 o ^ 
d.d ©d 3 ©*P 

pH fe CO ^05^ 

l^is g © p ®.2^2 o 

H ._ ^ ^ © 4-1 V 


© 

,d CO 


03' 


. © 

>% © 

h* Wi 


b S'O 2 ® o 
2 ag5 g>M 

„ « o « d 

rs*^ dO*d‘ 
— wK.d©‘'-'eo3 

"g ag ’=' £ ©.„.S 

2g'a.2'«2°| 

— 05 CO B ©-“, 

-i--^ ^ t_i ^ 


o 

CO 

© O g 

©•^.H 50 
d,HH CO 

P 3 •• © * 

A © 08 


© CO 03 CO 3 ©"^ 
c.'d © •** ^ -N b © 
o o'dcQ'd © 3 2 

I=3d53-^ 

^©.2 © bi'2-*^ 

ss 


© 
0,0 
K'^ 
© 


d'd 22 

o © d 

zS'a.a 

2*-m 
©^ bjo 

ft d:=3 
o o.^ 

O © O 
■*^ CO o 

^.5 o 9 

d^ 


© 

73 


2 o.ti 


a-2 


s ® 
-1^ 
d d § 
o o » 
o 
.0 


£*3 2 
3;d 


CO © '2 ni 3 

O © © © CO 

© 2 3 o3 

S'S-lS'® 

1-4 eo w p © 

s a®-®® 


^l§| 

p. 


cO 

lx 

b£) 


© 

©, 


^ © 

2^ 

3 

w o 

- --r^ © © 

5 a o^.a 

2S 03 W 

3 w 2 ,© « 

Vco ©’3'^ 
3 ^2 d © d 

11 3 CO 

.Or* 

|2S 

2.S ® 

3S^.« 

Ss d d 

fCXJ-'g 

^ o © a 

© 2'^ 


CO 

© 

»1 


©13 

*- 3 


3 

CO 

d 


d 

o 

*3 

© 

t>» 

O 

ft 

a 

© 

CO 

d 

o 

CO 

U4 

© 

ft 


CO 

bD 

d 


05 

© 


d 

© 

CO 

© 

ft 

S 


• «• 

s 

*44 

•4-A 

CO 

•44 

OS 

•4-5 

CQ 


d 

o 

• 44 

CO 

•44 

> 


< 

ft 


o-B-S 

^ d ^ 2 

S*'" S ® 

.£>»•.© 

CO © CO > 

dxj-ti 
2-“§2 
::3a'a . 
°5S“'3'2 .fe 

g-9>.g|s5 

.-.CO ©F 44 

CO ^ 3 3 > d^ 

2>*9-So1o 

bjOm Im rr^ d 

030 

14 gC5 

ft*"^ .44 d >-• d *-• 

g o.§5p=te&H 

^ I- ©« -• «» O 



157 







































































































































Table D—4 .—Percentage distribution of amount of public and private assistance and earnings under specified Federal 

work programs, by urban area, 1939 






Geographic division, State, 
and urban area' 

Total 
public 
and 
private 
funds s 

Total 

G 

Total 

Total___ 

100.0 

99.2 

25.9 

New England 




Connecticut: 




Bridgeport... 

100.0 

98.9 

25.0 

Hartford__ 

100.0 

94.5 

23.9 

New Britain.... 

100.0 

99. 5 

15.3 

New Haven_ 

100.0 

98.5 

26.9 

Maine: Portland_ 

100.0 

98.5 

20.9 

Massachusetts: 




Boston.... .. 

100.0 

97.2 

17.5 

Brockton___ 

100.0 

98.3 

15.3 

Cambridge.... 

100.0 

98.9 

27.8 

Fall River__ 

100.0 

99.9 

16.3 

Lawrence_ 

100.0 

99.4 

13.4 

Lowell_ 

100.0 

99.5 

17.8 

Lynn__ 

100.0 

99.0 

19.1 

Malden___ 

100.0 

100.0 

33.6 

New Bedford_ 

100.0 

99.5 

21.2 

Newton__ 

100.0 

98.1 

35. 2 

Springfield___ 

100.0 

99.1 

28.7 

Worcester_ 

100.0 

99.3 

32.7 

Rhode Island: Providence_ 

100.0 

98.7 

33.9 

Middle Atlantic 

New Jersey: 




Jersey City__ 

100.0 

99.9 

31.9 

Newark__ 

100.0 

99.8 

39.1 

Trenton__ 

100.0 

99.1 

31.5 

New York: 




Albany.. 

100.0 

98.5 

31.1 

Buffalo__ 

100.0 

99.2 

55.8 

New Rochelle_ 

100.0 

99.6 

64.3 

New York____ 

100.0 

98.8 

33.6 

Niagara Falls_ 

100.0 

99.1 

50.4 

Rochester_ 

100.0 

99.6 

56.5 

Syracuse _ ... 

100.0 

99.3 

49.2 

Utica_ _ 

100.0 

98.6 

35.4 

Yonkers__ 

100.0 

99.4 

38.1 

Pennsylvania: 




Allentown__ . 

100.0 

99.7 

20.0 

Altoona..__ 

100.0 

100.0 

26.7 

Bethlehem_ 

100.0 

99.7 

16.9 

Chester_ 

100.0 

99.4 

22.8 

Erie_ 

100.0 

100.0 

28.3 

Johnstown...__ 

100.0 

99.9 

25.1 

Philadelphia___ 

100.0 

99.0 

55.1 

Pittsburgh_ __ 

100.0 

99.4 

41.0 

Reading__ 

100.0 

99.7 

28.3 

Scranton___ 

100 . 0 

99.7 

35.5 

Wilkes-Barre__ 

100.0 

99.9 

36.9 

North Central 

Illinois: 




Chicago__ 

100.0 

99.2 

30.5 

Springfield_ 

100.0 

99.2 

16.5 

Indiana: 




Evansville.. _ ... 

100.0 

99.8 

12.1 

Fort Wayne_ 

100.0 

99.1 

11.9 

Indianapolis_ 

100.0 

99.0 

13.3 

South Bend_ 

100.0 

99.9 

16.6 

Terre Haute.... 

100.0 

99.7 

6.6 

Iowa: 




Des Moines.... 

100.0 

99.8 

13.1 

Sioux City____ 

100.0 

99.7 

29.1 

Kansas: 




Kansas City__ 

100.0 

99.9 

8.9 

Topeka... 

100.0 

99.0 

8.8 

Wichita_ 

100.0 

99.6 

25.7 

Michigan: 


Detroit__ 

100.0 

99.6 

18.7 

Flint_ 

100.0 

99.9 

17.2 

Grand Rapids_ 

100.0 

99.9 

9. 2 

Pontiac___ 

100.0 

99.9 

13.6 

Saginaw_ 

100.0 

99.6 

14.8 

Minnesota: 




Duluth__ 

100.0 

99.3 

23.1 

Minneapolis__ 

100.0 

99.5 

27.8 

St. Paul.... 

100.0 

99.4 

27.5 

Missouri: 



Kansas City__ 

100.0 

98.8 

9.4 

St. Louis___ 

100.0 

98.8 

8.3 

See footnotes at end of table. 




Public funds 


General relief s 


Direct 
relief ‘ 

Work 
relief * 

Civil 
Works 
Pro¬ 
gram « 





































































































































































































Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 


Special types of public assistance ’ 


Private 


ijects 
rated 
the 
PA 6 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

children 

Aid to 
the 
blind 


55.9 

17.4 

12.2 

4.5 

0.7 

0.8 

58.5 

16.4 

12.5 

2.7 

.2 

1.1 

49. 6 

21.0 

18.2 

2.5 

.3 

5.5 

69.1 

15.1 

12.1 

2.8 

.2 

.5 

52.5 

19.1 

16.0 

2.8 

.3 

1.5 

55.3 

22.3 

17.4 

3.7 

1.2 

1.6 

57.3 

22.4 

14.4 

7.7 

.3 

2.8 

55.1 

27.9 

24.3 

3.4 

.2 

1.7 

50.5 

20.6 

14.3 

6.0 

.3 

1.1 

61.4 

22.2 

18.1 

3.8 

.3 

.1 

59.0 

27.0 

23.9 

2.8 

.3 

.6 

58.8 

22.9 

18.3 

4.4 

.2 

.5 

50.2 

29.7 

26.0 

3.5 

.2 

1.0 

37.5 

28.9 

24.1 

4.6 

.2 

C) 

49.6 

28.7 

24.8 

3.6 

.3 

.5 

36.4 

26.5 

17.8 

8.6 

.1 

1.9 

44.8 

25.6 

20.0 

5.4 

.2 

.9 

43.9 

22.7 

17.5 

5.0 

.2 

.7 

47.7 

17.1 

12.5 

4.5 

.1 

1.3 

57.8 

10.2 

5.2 

4.8 

.2 

.1 

50.9 

9.8 

4.6 

6.0 

.2 

.2 

52.7 

14.9 

8.1 

6.6 

.3 

.9 

54.1 

13.3 

9.9 

3.0 

.4 

1.5 

33.0 

10.4 

6.0 

4.2 

.2 

.8 

15.3 

20.0 

11.0 

8.9 

.1 

.4 

52.0 

13.2 

6.7 

6.3 

.2 

w 1.2 

35.0 

13.7 

7.3 

6.3 

.1 

.9 

22.3 

20.8 

14.8 

6.7 

.3 

.4 

33.5 

16.6 

12.3 

4.1 

.2 

.7 

38.4 

24.8 

17.1 

7.5 

.2 

1.4 

47.2 

• 14.1 

7.2 

6.8 

.1 

.6 

66.3 

13.4 

8.1 

3.3 

2.0 

.3 

68.1 

15.2 

8.8 

4.6 

1.8 


69.1 

13.7 

7.8 

4.0 

1.9 

.3 

59.3 

17.3 

10.0 

4.9 

2.4 

.6 

5^5 

17.2 

11.4 

3.8 

2.0 

(») 

61.2 

13.6 

7.0 

6.2 

1.4 

.1 

28.4 

15.5 

7.8 

6.1 

1.6 

1.0 

47.2 

11.2 

6.3 

3.9 

1.0 

.6 

57.3 

14.1 

9.2 

2.6 

2.3 

.3 

65.0 

9.2 

4.9 

3.3 

1.0 

.3 

64.7 

8.3 

4.1 

3.2 

1.0 

.1 

56.0 

12.7 

11.1 

.8 

.8 

.8 

67.1 

15.6 

13.5 

.6 

1.5 

.8 

71.1 

16.6 

10.7 

5.5 

.4 

.2 

64.1 

23.1 

14.5 

8.1 

.5 

.9 

64.8 

20.9 

13.0 

7.3 

.6 

1.0 

65.8 

17.5 

11.1 

6.1 

.3 

.1 

74.0 

19.1 

13.8 

4.7 

.6 

.3 

67.7 

19.0 

17.2 

.8 

1.0 

.2 

48.4 

22.2 

19.3 

2.1 

.8 

.3 

77.1 

13.9 

9.0 

4.4 

.6 

.1 

69.5 

20.7 

13.5 

6.4 

.8 

1.0 

47.5 

26.4 

17.9 

7.7 

.8 

.4 

66.7 

14.2 

6.0 

8.1 

.1 

.4 

63.1 

19.6 

13.9 

6.6 

.1 

.1 

67.9 

22.8 

17.5 

6.1 

.2 

.1 

64.3 

22.0 

14.0 

7.8 

.2 

.1 

61.4 

23.4 

14.8 

8.4 

.2 

.4 

56.8 

19.4 

14.7 

4.4 

.3 

.7 

48.9 

22.8 

19.3 

3.2 

.3 

.6 

54.8 

17.1 

14.0 

2.8 

.3 

.6 

69.6 

19.8 

17.6 

1.1 

1.2 

0 1.2 

76.6 

14.9 

11.8 

2.1 

1.0 

1.2 


158 































































































































































Table D-4 .—Percentage distribution of amount of public and private assistance and earnings under specified Federal 

work programs, by urban area, 1959—Continued 


Geographic division, State, 
and urban area i 


Public funds 


North Central— Con. 

Nebraska: Omaha_ 

Ohio: 

Akron_ 

Canton_ 

Cincinnati_ 

Cleveland_ 

Columbus... 

Dayton_ 

Springfield- 

Toledo__ 

Youngstown_ 

Wisconsin: 

Kenosha_ 

Madison_ 

Milwaukee_ 

Racine_ 


Total 
public 
and 
private 
funds ’ 


South Atlantic and 
South Central 

Alabama: 

Birmingham- 

Mobile_ 

Delaware: V/ilmington_ 

Dist. of Col.: Washington— 
Florida: 

Jacksonville_ 

Miami_ 

Georgia: Atlanta- - 

Kentucky: Louisville- 

Louisiana: 

New Orleans_ 

Shreveport- 

Maryland: Baltimore- 

North Carolina: 

Asheville_ 

Charlotte_ 

Greensboro- 

Winston-Salem- 

Oldahoma: Tulsa- 

South Carolina: Charleston. 
Tennessee: 

Knoxville- 

Memphis_ 

Nashville_ 

Texas: 

Dallas- 

El Paso_ 

Fort Worth_ 

Houston_ 

San Antonio_ 

Virginia: 

Norfolk_ 

Richmond- 

Roanoke_ 

West Virginia: Huntington. 

Mountain and Pacific 
California: 

Los Angeles- 

Oakland_ 

Sacramento_ 

San Diego- 

San Francisco- 

Colorado: Denver- 

Oregon: Portland- 

Utah: Salt Lake City- 

Washington: 

Seattle- 

Tacoma-- 


Total 


100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

ICO.O 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 


100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 


100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 


General relief ’ 


Total 


98.4 

99.7 

100.0 

98.8 
99.1 
99.7 
99.7 

100.0 

99.9 
99.9 

99.9 

99.9 

99.5 

99.6 


100.0 

99.6 
98.2 
97.9 

99.7 
97.1 
99.0 
97.9 

99.0 

99.6 

97.8 

100.0 

99.4 

99.9 

95.6 

97.1 

99.7 

99.7 

98.8 

99.2 

98.7 

99.5 

99.9 
99.0 

98.6 

99.1 

96.3 
100.0 

99.6 


99.6 

99.8 

99.4 

99.9 
99.0 
99.6 
99.6 

99.5 

99.3 

100.0 


1.6 

10.1 

10.4 
20.1 
14. 5 

13.2 
19.0 

7.8 

11.9 

11.1 

16.4 

11.5 
23.7 

24.3 


1.1 
.8 
18.7 

5.6 

1.6 
3.5 
2.9 

12 6.6 

3.4 
14.3 
25. 5 

2.4 

5.7 

2.4 

4.8 

4.5 

1.9 


8 . 


Earnings under 
Federal work 
programs 


Direct 
relief * 

Work 
relief * 

Civil 

W orks c 
Pro¬ 
gram 2 











































































































































] 



i, 









) 






_ 




by the 
WPA « 


Special types of public assistance ' 


Total 


Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 


Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

children 


Aid to 
the 
blind 


Private 
funds * 


76.9 

19.9 

13.6 

5.9 

0.4 

1.6 

80.6 

9.0 

7.3 

1.6 

.2 

.3 

69.4 

20 . 2 

17.1 

2.7 

.4 

(•) 

60.0 

18.7 

15.4 

2.9 

.4 

1.2 

76.3 

8.3 

5.5 

2.6 

.2 

.9 

66.0 

20.5 

17.7 

2.1 

.7 

.3 

59.3 

21.4 

18.6 

2.4 

.4 

.3 


33. 9 

30. 5 

2.6 

.8 


75.1 

12.9 

11.1 

1.4 

. 4 

.1 

76.2 

12.6 

9.7 

2.3 

.6 

.1 

64.5 

19.0 

10.6 

7.7 

.7 

.1 

62.6 

25.8 

17.0 

8.4 

.4 

.1 

61.6 

14.2 

9.0 

4.8 

.4 

.5 

54.4 

20.9 

11.9 

8.6 

.4 

.4 

92.1 

6.8 

3.6 

3.0 

.2 

(•) 

90.8 

8.0 

6.4 

1.5 

.1 

.4 

64.9 

14.6 

9.3 

5.3 


1.8 

75.7 

16.6 

10.8 

5.1 

.7 

2.1 

82.6 

15.5 

12.6 

2.1 

.8 

.3 

62.4 

31.2 

23.9 

5.8 

1.5 

2.9 

89.2 

6.9 

3.7 

2.9 

.3 

1.0 

78.1 

13.2 

10.3 

2.9 


H2.1 

82.2 

13.4 

5.6 

7.4 

.4 

1.0 

33.9 

51.4 

26.5 

24.1 

.8 

.4 

31.5 

40.8 

20.2 

19.4 

1.2 

2.2 

84.6 

13.0 

8.8 

3.5 

.7 


68.2 

25.5 

17.3 

6.7 

1.5 

.6 

71.5 

26.0 

17.4 

7.2 

1.4 

.1 

74.1 

16.7 

11.3 

4.6 

.8 

4.4 

47.8 

44.8 

36.4 

7.3 

1.1 

2.9 

88.3 

9.5 

6.3 

2.8 

,4 

.3 

75.8 

21.5 

11.0 

10.0 

.5 

.3 

74.9 

20.7 

13.5 

6.1 

1.1 

1.2 

74.3 

23.4 

14.6 

7.7 

1.1 

.8 

67.4 

25.6 

25.2 

.3 


1.3 

85 6 

la « 

13. 8 



. 5 

73 2 

?.0 9. 

20 2 



.1 

68 3 

?19 F, 

22. 5 



1.0 

79 1 

IQ ft 

19. 6 



1.4 

83.1 

9.6 

7.3 

1.5 

.8 

.9 

73.3 

7.6 

6.2 

.9 

.5 

3.7 

76.1 

15.5 

12.0 

2.3 

1.2 


86.5 

9.2 

5.8 

3.0 

.4 

.4 

34.9 

3.5.6 

29.6 

3.4 

2.6 

.4 

54.5 

23.6 

18.3 

3.6 

1.7 

.2 

36.1 

44.4 

35.7 

6.3 

2.4 

.6 

39.0 

37.9 

32.7 

3.6 

1.6 

. 1 

54.2 

22.0 

17.9 

2.8 

1.3 

1.0 

38.5 

51.8 

44.6 

6 . 7 

.6 

.4 

56.7 

28.8 

24.9 

3.1 

.8 

. 4 

52.5 

31.8 

22.6 

8.9 

.3 

18. 5 

53.3 

31.4 

26.7 

3.8 

.9 

•7 

64. 5 

27.2 

22.4 

4.2 

.6 

1 


1 See aoD. A for the territory included in each urban area. Percentages 
based on figures which relate to territory other than that shown for the area 

*°2^FiSu^s^on wUch*^these percentages are based exclude cost of administr^ 
tion; of materials, equipment, and other items incident to operation of work 

’^^i'igurl's^on which \heL°percentages are based include statutory aid to 
veterans administered on basis of need. 

2 Figures not available. 

« f£s fmm Hil^WPA, Division of Statistics, on which these percentages 

are based represent earnings of persons employed on projects operated by the 
WPA wltXIhese areas! figures are not available for earnings of persons 
employed on projects other than those operated by the WPA. 


States with plans approved by the Social Security Board and for areas in 

States not participating under the Social Security Act. 

* Figures on which these percentages are based include direct and work re¬ 
lief and aid to veterans. 

2 Less than 0.1 percent. . i • 

12 Figure on which this percentage is based is more inclusive than those 
published for 1929-38 in that it contains an estimate for annuai expendi¬ 
tures of 30 agencies unable to report monthly flgiires. 

11 At the beginning of 1939 reporting area was changed from city to county. 

■2 Figure on which this percentage is based relates to city. 

12 Figure on which this percentage is based is incomplete since data not ob¬ 
tainable for 1 relief program. 

159 















































































































































































Table Percentage distribution of amount of public and private assistance and earnings under specified 

Federal work programs, by urban area, 1940 


Public funds 


Geographic division, State, 
and urban area i 

Total 

public 

and 


General relief * 

Earnings under Fed¬ 
eral Work programs 

Special types of public assistance» 

Private 

private 
funds > 

Total 

Total 

Direct 
relief * 

Work 
relief ‘ 

Civil 
Works 
Program * 

Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA « 

Total 

Old-age 

assistance 

Aid to de¬ 
pendent 
children 

Aid to the 
blind 


Total__ 

100.0 

99.0 

26.5 




49.1 

23.4 

16.6 

5.9 

0.9 

1.0 





New England 













Connecticut: 

Bridgeport_ 

100.0 

98.6 

25.7 




49.1 

23.8 

19.6 

3.9 

.3 

1.4 

Hartford.... 

100.0 

95.1 

36.1 




34.8 

21.2 

21.2 

2.6 

.4 

4.9 

New Britain_ 

100.0 

99.1 

13.6 




62. 2 

23.3 

19.2 

3.9 

.2 

.9 

New Haven.. 

100.0 

98.6 

26.6 




48. 7 

23.3 

20.0 

2.9 

.4 

1.6 

Maine: Portland.. 

100.0 

98.8 

18.1 




66.1 

24.6 

19.2 

4 2 

1.2 

1.2 

Massachusetts: 

Boston.... 

100.0 

97.0 

18.7 




60.4 

27.9 

17. 7 

9.9 

.3 

3.0 

Brockton___ 

100.0 

98.4 

19.2 




45.9 

33.3 

29.0 

4.1 

.2 

1.6 

Cambridge.... 

100.0 

98.8 

31.2 




41.2 

26.4 

17.3 

8.8 

.3 

1.2 

Fall River_ 

100.0 

99.9 

28.1 




45.7 

26.1 

21.3 

4.5 

.3 

.1 

Lawrence_ 

100.0 

99.4 

20.4 




49. 7 

29.3 

25.6 

3.4 

.3 

.6 

Lowell.. 

100.0 

99.3 

21.2 




60. 5 

27. 6 

22.4 

4.9 

.3 

.7 

Lynn.... 

100.0 

98.9 

20.6 




45.5 

32. 8 

28.5 

4.0 

.3 

1.1 

Malden..__ 

100.0 

99.9 

30.6 




38.1 

31.2 

25. 5 

5. 5 

.2 

.1 

New Bedford_... 

100.0 

99.5 

18.9 




46.8 

33.8 

28.9 

4.6 

.3 

.6 

Newton.. 

100.0 

97.8 

32.5 




31.0 

34.3 

23.7 

10.4 

. 2 

2.2 

Springfield_ 

100.0 

99.3 

28.0 




39.0 

32.3 

25. 1 

7.0 

.2 

.7 

Worcester..... 

100.0 

99.1 

30.6 




38.4 

30.1 

23.2 

6.7 

.2 

.9 

Rhode Island: Providence_ 

100.0 

98.7 

33.0 




48.2 

17.5 

13.0 

4.4 

. 1 

1.3 

Middle Atlantic 











New Jersey: 

Jersey City__ 

100.0 

99.8 

39.3 




41.1 

19.4 

9.7 

9.3 

.4 

.2 

Newark... . 

100.0 

99.6 

40.1 




45.8 

13. 7 

6 . 7 

6.7 

.3 

.4 

Trenton_ 

100.0 

98.9 

24.5 




54. 9 

19.5 

10.7 

8.3 

.6 

1.1 

New York: 

Albany_ 

100.0 

98.3 

35.3 




41.9 

21.1 

15.5 

4.9 

.7 

1.7 

Buffalo..... 

100.0 

98.9 

63.6 




31.4 

13.9 

8.6 

5.0 

,3 

1.1 

New Rochelle_ 

100.0 

99.4 

61.5 




14.1 

23.8 

13.9 

9.9 


.6 

New York__ 

100.0 

98.7 

37.0 




45.1 

16.6 

9.3 

7.0 

.3 

• 1.3 

Niagara Falls_ 

100.0 

98.9 

55.5 




24.4 

19.0 

10.1 

8.7 

.2 

1.1 

Rochester... 

100.0 

99.4 

53.5 




19.9 

26.0 

19. 2 

6.4 

.4 

.6 

Syracuse ■».__ 

100.0 

99.2 

46.9 




30. 2 

22.1 

17.1 

4. 7 

.3 

.8 

Utica..... 

100.0 

98.4 

40.6 




28.4 

29. 5 

20 . 6 

8 . 7 

.2 

1 

Yonkers.__ 

100.0 

99.3 

43.2 




39.1 

17.0 

8.7 

8.1 

. 2 

.7 

Pennsylvania: 

Allentown_ 

100.0 

99.5 

12.8 




64. 9 

21.8 

12.6 

6.0 

3. 2 

.6 

Altoona__ _ 

100.0 

100.0 

15.3 




62. 6 

22.1 

11. 5 

8 . 2 

2 4 

(») 

.3 

Bethlehem...... 

100.0 

99.7 

13.0 




66.1 

20.6 

12 . 0 

6.0 

2.6 

Chester_ 

100.0 

99.2 

13.5 




58.4 

49.3 

27.3 

15. 2 

8.7 
8 . 4 

3.4 

2 8 

.8 

(“) 

.1 

Erie__ 

100.0 

100.0 

22.0 




28. 7 

17. 5 

Johnstown_ 

100.0 

99.9 

18.5 




58. 9 

22.5 

10.8 

9. 5 

2 . 2 

Philadelphia_ 

100.0 

99.0 

42.1 




32.0 

24.9 

12.2 

10. 9 

1 8 

1.0 

Pittsburgh..... 

100.0 

99.4 

33.0 




48.0 

18.4 

9. 9 

7. 2 

1.3 

.6 

Reading__ 

100.0 

99.6 

15.6 




66 . 0 

18.0 

11.3 

4.1 

2.6 

.4 

Scranton.__ 

100.0 

99.6 

41.9 




42.0 

15. 7 

8.1 

6 3 

1.3 

1.4 

.4 

Wilkes-Barre_ 

100.0 

99.9 

38.9 




45.6 

15.5 

7.4 

6.7 

.1 

North Central 







Hlinois: 

Chicago___ 

100.0 

98.9 

33.2 




48.8 

60.7 

54.5 

55.6 

54.7 

54.2 

61.3 

62.8 

43.8 

68.1 

68.5 
39.7 

56.6 
60.0 

54.6 

53.2 

66.2 

50.9 

47.1 

45.4 

61.2 

66.4 

68.4 

16.9 
19. 9 

15.0 

17.9 

1.0 

.7 

.9 

1.3 

. 5 

1 . 1 

Springfield.. 

100.0 

99.2 

18.6 




.8 

Indiana: 

Evansville_ 

100.0 

99.7 

21.0 




24 2 

15.3 

8.4 

.3 

Fort Wayne_ 

100.0 

99.1 

12.7 




30 8 

20 4 

9. 8 

. 6 

.9 

Indianapolis.. _ 

100.0 

99.0 

13.7 




30. 6 

19 4 

10 2 

1 . 0 

1.0 

South Bend_ 

100.0 

99.8 

19.9 




25. 7 

16. 7 

8 6 

.4 

.2 

Terre Haute_ 

100.0 

99.6 

9.9 




28.4 

21.3 

20.1 

19.3 
22.8 

12.5 

14.7 

19.6 

7.6 

17.8 

24.3 
22.0 

18.4 

16.3 
22.2 

16.9 

22.0 

16.4 
17.2 

7 6 

. 7 

. 4 

Iowa: 

Des Moines.. 

100.0 

99.8 

15.7 




.8 

2.2 

5.9 

6.0 

8.6 

10.3 
8.8 
6.6 

11.2 

11.6 

5.8 

4.3 
4.3 

2.5 

4.5 
8.0 

1.2 

.9 

. 7 

.2 

Sioux City_ ._ 

100 0 

99.7 

30.0 




25 9 

.3 

Kansas: 

Kansas City___ 

100.0 

99. 9 

12. 7 




19.1 

. 1 

Topeka__ 

100.0 

99.1 

9.0 




21.6 
29 1 

9 

.9 

.3 

Wichita.. 

100.0 

99.7 

30.9 




.9 

Michigan: 

Detroit__ 

100.0 

99.5 

24.8 




18.1 

26.8 

31.3 

33.5 

30.3 

22.5 
26.9 

21.7 

25.7 
22.0 
25.7 

J5 

Flint.... 

100.0 

100.0 

13.2 




.-2 

(”> 

.1 

.1 

4 

Grand Rapids_ 

100.0 

99.9 

14.0 




4 

Pontiac__ 

100.0 

99.9 

13.2 




.-3 

Saginaw... .. 

100.0 

99.6 

13.1 




3 

Minnesota: 

Duluth_ 

100.0 

99.3 

25.9 




4 

7 

Minneapolis__ 

100.0 

99.4 

25.4 




4 

7 

St. Paul_ 

100.0 

99.3 

32.2 




5 

Missouri: 

Kansas City.... 

100.0 

98.7 

11.8 




1.2 

1.1 

.5 

1.3 

1.6 

1.9 

St. Louis... 

100.0 

98.5 

10.1 




Nebraska: Omaha_ . 

100.0 

98.1 1 

4.0 1.1 




See footnotes at end of table. 


160 


X 
































































































































































Table D-5. Percentage distribution of amount of public and private assistance and earnings under specified 

tederal work programs, by urban area, 1940 —Continued 


Geographic division. State, 
and urban area i 

Total 
public 
and 
private 
funds > 

Public 

Total 

General relief * 

Earnings u 
eral work 

Total 

Direct 
relief < 

Work 
relief ‘ 

Civil 
Works 
Program« 

Nokth Central—C on. 







Ohio: 







Akron.... 

100.0 

99.6 

13.9 




Canton__ 

100.0 

99.9 

10.4 




Cincinnati_ 

100.0 

98.5 

24.2 




Cleveland__ 

100.0 

98.6 

22.5 




Columbus. 

100.0 

99.7 

15.1 




Dayton.__ 

100.0 

99.7 

20.0 




Springfield—. 

100.0 

99.4 

6.6 




Toledo__ 

100.0 

99.9 

12.4 




Youngstown_ 

100.0 

99.8 

14.0 




Wisconsin: 







Kenosha__ 

100.0 

99.9 

24 3 




Madison___ 

100.0 

99.9 

15.9 




Milwaukee.. 

100.0 

99.4 

27.9 




Racine.... 

100.0 

99.5 

24. 7 




South Atlantic and 







South Central 







Alabama: 







Birmingham..... 

100.0 

99.9 

1 Q 




Mobile.... 

100.0 

99.6 

.8 




Delaware: Wilmington_ 

100.0 

98.3 

15.4 




Dist. of Col.: Washington.. .. 

100.0 

97.9 

6.7 




Florida: 







Jacksonville.. 

100.0 

99.7 

1.9 




Miami__ 

100.0 

95.2 

4 f\ 




Georgia: Atlanta n_ 

100.0 

98.7 

4.6 




Kentucky: Louisville_ 

100.0 

97.8 

8.9 




Louisiana: 







New Orleans_ 

100.0 

98.9 

5. 4 




Shreveport__ 

100.0 

99.6 

15.2 




Maryland: Baltimore... 

100.0 

98.0 

22.1 




North Carolina: 







Asheville___ 

100.0 

100.0 

2. 5 




Charlotte__ 

100.0 

99.4 

' 6.0 




Greensboro_ 

100.0 

99.9 

3.0 




W inston-Salem.. 

100.0 

96.7 

6.8 




Oklahoma: Tulsa__ 

100.0 

97.1 

2.8 




South Carolina: Charleston... 

100.0 

99.7 

1.5 




Tennessee: 







Knoxville_ . 

100.0 

100.0 

1.6 




Memphis_ 

100.0 

98.5 

1.0 




Nashville__ 

100.0 

98.6 

1. 2 




Texas: 







Dallas_ 

100.0 

98.7 

6.1 




El Paso_ 

100.0 

99.6 

. 3 




Fort Worth__ 

100.0 

99.9 

4. 5 




Houston. 

100.0 

98.8 

7.4 




San Antonio_ 

100.0 

98.7 





Virginia: 







Norfolk.__ _ 

100.0 

98.8 

4.1 




Richmond_ .. 

100.0 

96.8 

9. 0 




Roanoke.... 

100.0 

100.0 

8. 6 




West Virginia: Huntington... 

100.0 

99.5 

6.6 




Mountain and Pacific 







California: 







Los Angeles..._ 

100.0 

99.6 

25. 9 




Oakland.... 

100.0 

99. 7 

16. 9 




Sacramento_ 

100.0 

99.4 

12.0 




San Diego_ . 

100.0 

99.9 

16. 4 




San Francisco__ 

100.0 

98. 7 

19. 9 




Colorado: Denver... 

100.0 

99.6 

9.0 




Oregon: Portland_ 

100.0 

99.7 

15. 5 




Utah: Salt Lake City.... 

100.0 

99.5 

15.9 




Washington: 







Seattle..... 

100.0 

99.4 

14.0 




Tacoma 

100.0 

100.0 

7. 2 





Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA« 


72.7 

68.0 

49.6 
62.9 

56.4 

49.3 

52.5 
66.0 

64.7 

48.2 

62.6 

61.7 

42.5 


87.3 

91.3 
66.1 
75.0 

79.1 

55.3 

84.6 

71.2 

74.6 

28.5 

36.2 

80.9 

68.0 

68.3 

71.2 

40.8 

89.9 

76.3 

70.4 

67.6 

67.4 
88.3 
76.1 
69.0 

77.8 

78.6 

76.1 

65.2 

78.9 


29.0 

61.5 

34.2 

34.2 

47.7 

36.2 

61.8 
47.1 

47.8 

60.3 




Special types of public assistance i 






Private 





funds • 

Total 

Old-age 

assistance 

Aid to de¬ 
pendent 
children 

Aid to the 
blind 


13.0 

11.0 

1.8 

0.2 

0.4 

31.5 

27.3 

3.6 

.6 

. 1 

24.7 

20.6 

3.6 

.5 

1. 5 

13.2 

9.1 

3.8 

.3 

1.4 

28.2 

24.8 

2.6 

.9 

.3 

30.4 

27.2 

2.7 

.5 

.3 

41.3 

37.4 

3.0 

.9 

.6 

21.5 

18.7 

2.2 

.6 

.1 

21.1 

16.5 

3.6 

1.0 

.2 

27.4 

16.3 

10.3 

.8 

.1 

31.4 

19.9 

11.0 

.5 

.1 

19.8 

13.3 

6.0 

.5 

.6 

32.3 

18.9 

12.8 

.6 

.6 

10.7 

5.2 

5.3 

.2 

.1 

7.5 

6.9 

1.5 

. 1 

.4 

16.8 

10.6 

6.2 


1.7 

16.2 

11.0 

4. 5 

.7 

2.1 

18.7 

14.8 

2.9 

1.0 

.3 

35.3 

25.5 

8.2 

1.6 

4.8 

9.5 

5.6 

3.6 

‘ .4 

1.3 

17.7 

13.6 

4.1 


2. 2 

18.9 

7.5 

10.8 

.6 

1.1 

65.9 

28.3 

26.5 

1.1 

.4 

39.7 

21.1 

17.4 

1.2 

2.0 

16.6 

10.9 

6.0 

.7 


26.4 

17.5 

7.5 

1.4 

.6 

28.6 

18.0 

9.2 

1.4 

.1 

18.7 

12.0 

6.9 

.8 

3.3 

63.5 

42.3 

9.8 

1.4 

2.9 

8.3 

6.4 

2.5 

.4 

.3 

22.1 

10.1 

11.6 

.4 


27.1 

17.4 

8.6 

1.1 

1.5 

29.8 

17.5 

11.3 

1.0 

1.4 

26.2 

26.0 

.2 


1.3 

10.9 

10.9 



.6 

19.3 

19.3 



. 1 

22.4 

22.4 



1 9 . 

20.9 

20.9 



1.3 

16.1 

10.7 

4.5 

.9 

1.2 

11.7 

7.6 

3.5 

.6 

3.2 

26. 2 

17.3 

7.3 

1.6 


14.0 

8.8 

4.6 

.6 

.6 

44.7 

37.8 

4.0 

2.9 

.4 

31.3 

25.1 

4.2 

2.0 

.3 

63.2 

43.7 

7.1 

2.4 

.6 

49.3 

42.4 

4.9 

2.0 

.1 

31.1 

26.0 

3.5 

1.6 

1.3 

64.4 

46.6 

7.3 

.6 

.4 

32.4 

27.4 

4.2 

.8 

.3 

36.5 

25.1 

11.0 

.4 

H.5 

37.6 

31.6 

4.9 

1.1 

.6 

32.5 

27.0 

4.8 

.7 



I See app. A for the territory included in each urban area. Percentages 
based on figures which relate to territory other than that shown for the area 
in app. A are footnoted. 

» Figures on which these percentages are based exclude cost of adminis¬ 
tration; of materials, equipment, and other items incident to operation of 
work programs; and of transient care. Figures on which percentages for 
assistance programs are based differ from those published for previous years 
in that they include obligations incurred for burials, in addition to obliga¬ 
tions incurred for money payments, assistance in kind, medical care, and 
hosp^italization. 

* Figures on which these percentages are based include statutory aid to 
veterans administered on basis of need. See also footnote 2. 

‘ Figures not available. 

«Terminated in 1934. 

• Figures from the WPA', Division of Statistics, on which these percentages 
are based represent earnings of persons employed on projects operated by 


the WPA within these areas; figures are not available for earnings of persons 
employed on projects other than those operated by the WPA. 

’’ Figures on which these percentages are based include data for areas in 
States with plans approved by the Social Security Board and for areas in 
States not participating under the Social Security Act. See also footnote 2. 

* Figures on which these percentages are based include direct and work 
relief and aid to veterans. See also footnote 2. 

* Figure on which this percentage is based is more inclusive than those 
published for 1929-38 in that it contains an estimate for annual expenditures 
of 30 agencies unable to report monthly figures. 

10 At the beginning of 1939 reporting area was changed from city to county. 

11 Less than 0.1 percent. 

» At the beginning of 1940 reporting area was changed to Fulton County 
and all De Kalb County. 

11 Figure on which this percentage is based is incomplete since data not 
obtainable for 1 relief program. 


161 





















































































































































Table D—6 .—Amount per inhabitant * of public and private assistance and earnings under specified Federal work 

programs, by urban area, 1939 


Geographic division, State, 
and urban area > 

Total 
public 
and 
private 
funds’ 


Total 


Total 

Median ic.... 

$23.36 

$23.05 

$3.91 

New England 




Connecticut: 




Bridgeport__ 

19.43 

19.22 

4.85 

Hartford_ 

19.61 

18. 53 

4.68 

New Britain_ 

16.59 

16. 51 

2. 55 

New Haven .. 

22.64 

22.30 

6.10 

Maine: Portland... 

16. 46 

16.22 

3.45 

Massachusetts: 




Boston__ 

43.42 

42.22 

7.60 

Brockton_ 

44.78 

44.01 

6.83 

Cambridge_ 

31.39 

31.04 

8. 72 

Fall River__ 

32.02 

31.99 

6. 22 

Lawrence__ 

25.94 

25.78 

3. 47 

Lowell__ 

41.59 

41.36 

7.39 

Lynn.... 

34.74 

34. 38 

6. 64 

Malden___ 

25.92 

25.91 

8.70 

New Bedford_ 

33.50 

33.32 

7.11 

Newton...... 

16.83 

16.52 

5. 92 

Springfield... 

30.50 

30.22 

8. 76 

Worcester.. 

30.86 

30.64 

10.08 

Rhode {Island: Providence_ 

21.06 

20.79 

7.15 

Middle Atlantic 




New Jersey: 




Jersey City.. 

19.56 

19.54 

6.24 

Newark..... 

35.13 

35.04 

13.73 

Trenton_ 

20.20 

20.01 

6.35 

New York: 




Albany_ 

13.62 

13.42 

4.24 

Buffalo.... . 

24.21 

24.01 

13.52 

New Rochelle_ .. 

20.89 

20.80 

13.43 

New York_ .. 

32.24 

31.86 

10. 83 

Niagara Falls__ 

17.43 

17.27 

8.78 

Rochester _ 

27.07 

26.97 

15.31 

Syracuse 12 __ 

22. 65 

22. 49 

11.15 

Utica__ 

21.68 

21.37 

7.68 

Yonkers_ 

24. 79 

24.64 

9. 45 

Pennsvlvania: 




Allentown_ 

18.05 

17. 99 

3.61 

Altoona__ 

28. 71 

28.70 

7. 65 

Bethlehem.. 

20.20 

20.14 

3.41 

Chester... 

11.90 

11.83 

2. 71 

Erie_ ... 

26.00 

26.00 

7. 35 

Johnstown_ 

28. 95 

28.93 

7.27 

Philadelphia..... 

27.47 

27.20 

15.13 

Pittsburgh_ 

31.15 

30.97 

12.78 

Reading_ 

20.03 

19.96 

5.67 

Scranton... 

40.65 

40. 52 

14.43 

Wilkes-Barre... 

36.51 

36.47 

13.49 

Noetii Central 




Illinois: 




Chicago..__ 

28.40 

28.16 

8.67 

Springfield... 

28.81 

28.68 

4. 75 

Indiana: 




Evansville_ 

34.33 

34.27 

4.17 

Fort Wayne_ .. 

20. 34 

20.17 

2. 43 

Indianapolis.... 

25.74 

25. 49 

3. 43 

South Bend. 

23.55 

23. 52 

3.91 

Terre Haute.. .. 

42.65 

42.43 

2.79 

Iowa: 




Des Moines_ 

30.85 

30.77 

4.03 

Sioux City_ 

24.09 

24.01 

7.01 

Kansas: 




Kansas City. ... 

25.41 

25.38 

2.25 

Topeka_ 

16.16 

16.00 

1.43 

Wichita_ 

17.61 

17.46 

4.50 

Michigan: 




Detroit__ 

25.86 

25.76 

4.83 

Flint...__ 

21.65 

21.64 

3.73 

Grand Rapids_ 

29.16 

29.12 

2.68 

Pontiac_ 

16.97 

16.96 

2.31 

Saginaw__ 

18.86 

18.78 

2. 79 

Minnesota: 




Duluth__ . 

44.25 

43.95 

10.24 

Minneapolis_ 

33.28 

33.12 

9. 27 

St. Paul_ 

32.24 

32.03 

8.85 

Missouri: 




Kansas City....... 

23.16 

22.82 

2.18 

St. Louis_ 

19.67 

19.43 

1.64 

Nebraska: Omaha_ 

26.96 

26.53 

.42 


Public funds 


General relief < 


Earnings under Fed¬ 
eral work programs 


Special types of public assistance * 


Private 


Direct 
relief ‘ 

Work 
relief • 

Civil 
Works 
Program * 








































































































































































































Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA 1 

Total 

Old-age 

assistance 

Aid to de¬ 
pendent 
children 

Aid to the 
blind 

lUIiUS ’ 

$13.10 

$4.15 

$2.78 

$1.01 

$0.10 

$0. 13 

11.37 

3.00 

2.44 

.53 

.03 

.21 

9.72 

4.13 

3. 58 

.50 

.05 

1.08 

11.47 

2. 49 

2.00 

.47 

.02 

.08 

11.88 

4. 32 

3.63 

.62 

.07 

.34 

9.10 

3.67 

2.86 

.61 

.20 

.24 

24.89 

9.73 

6. 27 

3.34 

.12 

1.20 

24.66 

12. 52 

10.90 

1.53 

.09 

.77 

15.86 

6. 46 

4.47 

1.89 

.10 

.35 

19.66 

7.11 

5.78 

1.23 

.10 

.03 

15.30 

7.01 

6.19 

.75 

.07 

.16 

24.44 

9.53 

7.61 

1.83 

.09 

.23 

17. 44 

10.30 

9.02 

1.20 

.08 

.36 

9. 71 

7.50 

6.26 

1.18 

.06 

.01 

16.61 

9.60 

8. 32 

1.19 

.09 

.18 

6.13 

4.47 

3.00 

1.45 

.02 

.31 

13.65 

7.81 

6.10 

1.65 

.06 

.28 

13.56 

7.00 

5.42 

1.53 

.05 

.22 

10.04 

3.60 

2.64 

.94 

.02 

.27 

11.30 

2.00 

1.01 

.95 

.04 

.02 

17.88 

3. 43 

1.61 

1.76 

.06 

.09 

10.65 

3.01 

1.63 

1.32 

.06 

.19 

7.37 

1.81 

1.35 

.40 

.06 

.20 

7.98 

2. 51 

1.46 

1.00 

.05 

.20 

3.20 

4.17 

2. 30 

1.86 

.01 

.09 

16. 77 

4. 26 

2.16 

2.04 

.06 

».38 

6.10 

2.39 

1.28 

1.09 

.02 

.16 

6.04 

5.62 

4.00 

1.53 

.09 

.10 

7.59 

3. 75 

2.79 

.92 

.04 

.16 

8.32 

5.37 

3.70 

1.63 

.04 

.31 

11.70 

3.49 

1.79 

1.67 

.03 

.15 

11.97 

2. 41 

1.45 

.59 

.37 

.06 

16.69 

4. 36 

2. 52 

1.31 

.53 

.01 

13.96 

2. 77 

1.57 

.81 

.39 

.06 

7. 06 

2.06 

1.20 

.58 

.28 

.07 

14.17 

4. 48 

2.96 

.99 

.53 

(13) 

17. 72 

3. 94 

2.01 

1.52 

.41 

.02 

7.81 

4.26 

2.15 

1.68 

.43 

.27 

14. 72 

3.47 

1.94 

1.21 

.32 

.18 

11.47 

2.82 

1.84 

.52 

.46 

.07 

22.37 

3.72 

2.00 

1.31 

.41 

.13 

19. 96 

3.02 

1.49 

1.15 

.38 

.04 

15.89 

3.60 

3.14 

.24 

.22 

.24 

19.34 

4.49 

3.89 

.17 

.43 

.23 

24.40 

5.70 

3.67 

1.88 

.15 

.06 

13.04 

4.70 

2.94 

1.65 

.11 

.17 

16. 67 

5.39 

3.33 

1.89 

.17 

.25 

15.49 

4.12 

2.62 

1.43 

.07 

.03 

31.51 

8.13 

5.87 

2.02 

.24 

.12 

20.89 

5.85 

5.31 

.24 

.30 

.08 

11.67 

5.33 

4.64 

.51 

.18 

.08 

19.60 

3. 53 

2.29 

1.12 

.12 

.03 

11.23 

3. 34 

2.18 

1.03 

.13 

.16 

8.32 

4.63 

3.14 

1.35 

.14 

.06 

17.26 

3.67 

1.54 

2.10 

.03 

.10 

13.66 

4.25 

3.00 

1.22 

.03 

.01 

19.80 

6.64 

5.10 

1.47 

.07 

.04 

10.92 

3.73 

2.37 

1.33 

.03 

.01 

11.58 

4.41 

2.80 

1.57 

.04 

.08 

25.13 

8.58 

6. 51 

1.93 

.14 

.30 

16.27 

7.58 

6.41 

1.07 

.10 

.16 

17.67 

5. 51 

4.50 

.90 

.11 

.21 

16.07 

4.57 

4.05 

.25 

.27 

1‘.34 

14.87 

2.92 

2.32 

.41 

.19 

.24 

20.74 

5.37 

3.67 

1.59 

.11 

.43 


See footnotes at end of table. 


162 





























































































































































Table D—6 .—Amount per inhabitant 


of public and private assistance and earnings under specified Federal work 


programs, by urban area, 1939 —Continued 


Geographic division. State, 
and urban area * 

Total 
public 
and 
private 
funds 3 


Total 

Gei 

Total 

North Central—C on. 




Ohio: 




Akron,.. 

$36.99 

$36. 89 

$3. 74 

Canton_ 

23.99 

23.99 

2. 49 

Cincinnati. . _ 

23. 56 

23. 27 

4. 74 

Cleveland. _ 

40. 84 

40. 46 

5. 93 

Columbus__ 

27.32 

27. 25 

3. 62 

Dayton.. 

24.69 

24. 52 

4. 69 

Springfield__ 

22.57 

22. 57 

1.76 

Toledo_ _ 

38. 91 

38.89 

4. 64 

Youngstown. _ 

25. 59 

25.57 

2. 84 

Wisconsin: 




Kenosha_ 

40.93 

40. 87 

6. 71 

Madison__ 

25. 27 

25. 24 

2.90 

Milwaukee. _ 

33. 85 

33. 69 

8.02 

Racine--- 

28.27 

28.15 

6.87 

South Atlantic and South 




Central 




Alabama: 




Birmingham- 

16.03 

16.03 

.18 

Mobile_ 

10. 83 

10.79 

.08 

Delaware: Wilmington_ 

12.50 

12. 27 

2. 34 

Dist. of Col: Washington_ 

14. 36 

14.06 

.81 

Florida: 




Jacksonville_ 

21.97 

21.90 

..36 

Miami__ 

8.03 

7. 80 

.28 

Georgia: Atlanta__ 

16. 65 

16. 48 

.48 

Kentucky: Louisville.. 

10.12 

9. 86 

.78 

Louisiana: 




New Orleans_ 

26. 72 

26. 47 

.90 

Shreveport__ 

4.19 

4.17 

.60 

Maryland: Baltimore.—. 

10.85 

10. 62 

2.77 

North Carolina: 




Asheville. --- 

14. 59 

14.59 

.35 

Charlotte_ 

7.58 

7. 53 

.43 

Greensboro__ 

7. 27 

7. 26 

. 17 

Winston-Salem.. 

11.57 

11.06 

.55 

Oklahoma: Tulsa_ 

14.49 

14.07 

.65 

South Carolina: Charleston— 

17.74 

17.69 

.33 

Tennessee: 




Knoxville_ 

10.44 

10. 41 

.25 

Memphis_ 

10. 73 

10. 60 

.34 

NashvOle_ 

10.27 

10.19 

. 15 

Texas: 




Dallas_ 

10.15 

10. 02 

.59 

El Paso..__ 

7.76 

7. 72 

.01 

Fort Worth.. 

17. 32 

17. 30 

1.13 

Houston. __ 

7. 50 

7. 42 

.61 


11. 66 

11.50 


Virginia: 




Norfolk__ 

8.02 

7. 95 

. 61 

Richmond. _ 

10. 05 

9. 67 

1. 55 

Roanoke_ _ 

5. 24 

5.24 

.44 

West Virginia: Huntington... 

22. 31 

22.21 

.87 

Mountain and Pacific 




California: 




TiO.*? A ngeles ... _ 

25.60 

25.50 

7.44 

Oakland _ _ 

32.18 

32.10 

6.97 

Rflprampnto . . 

21. 11 

20. 98 

3. 98 


28.16 

28.12 

6. 49 


33. 76 

33. 43 

7. 72 

Pnlnrado* Denver .. 

26.50 

26. 39 

2. 47 

Oregon: Portland 

22.28 

22.20 

3. 15 

TTfab' Salt Lake City 

24. 42 

24. 31 

3.73 

Washington: 




Seattle _ ____ 

21.09 

20. 94 

3.08 

Tacoma 

29. 47 

29. 47 

2. 45 


Public funds 


General relief < 


Earnings under Fed¬ 
eral work programs 


Direct 
relief ' 

Work 
relief' 

Civil 
Works 
Program ® 

































































































































































Special types of public assistance * 


Private 


Projects 
iperated 
by the 
WPA7 

Total 

Old-age 

assistance 

Aid to de¬ 
pendent 
children 

Aid to the 
blind 

lunas * 

$29. 82 

$3. 33 

$2. 71 

$0.55 

$0.07 

$0.10 

16. 66 

4.84 

4.10 

.64 

.10 

(I») 

14.13 

4. 40 

3. 62 

.68 

.10 

.29 

31.16 

3. 37 

2. 23 

1.06 

.08 

.38 

18.02 

5.61 

4. 85 

.57 

.19 

.07 

14. 58 

5. 25 

4. 56 

.59 

.10 

.07 

13.15 

7. 66 

6. 89 

.58 

.19 


29. 22 

5. 03 

4. 32 

.56 

.15 

.02 

19.51 

3. 22 

2.48 

.58 

.16 

.02 

26. 38 

7.78 

4. 36 

3.15 

.27 

.06 

15. 83 

6. 51 

4. 29 

2.13 

.09 

.03 

20.87 

4.80 

3. 04 

1.62 

.14 

.16 

15. 39 

5.89 

3.34 

2.44 

.11 

.12 

14. 77 

1.08 

.58 

.48 

.02 

(l») 

9. 83 

.88 

.70 

.16 

.02 

.04 

8.10 

1. 83 

1.16 

.67 


.23 

10. 87 

2.38 

1.54 

.74 

.10 

.30 

18. 14 

3.40 

2.77 

.45 

.18 

.07 

5.01 

2.51 

1.92 

.47 

.12 

.23 

14.85 

1.15 

.62 

.48 

.05 

.17 

7.76 

1. 32 

1.03 

.29 


M. 26 

21.97 

3. 60 

1. 51 

1.98 

.11 

.25 

1.42 

2.15 

1.11 

1.01 

.03 

.02 

3. 42 

4.43 

2.20 

2.10 

.13 

.23 

12. 34 

1.90 

1. 29 

.51 

.10 


5.17 

1.93 

1. 31 

.51 

.11 

.05 

5.20 

1.89 

1. 27 

.52 

.10 

.01 

8. 58 

1.93 

1.31 

.53 

.09 

.51 

6. 93 

6. 49 

5.27 

1.06 

.16 

.42 

15. 66 

1.70 

1.13 

.50 

.07 

.05 

7. 92 

2.24 

1.14 

1.05 

.05 

.03 

8.03 

2.2z 

1.45 

.66 

.12 

.13 

7. 64 

2.40 

1.50 

.79 

.11 

.08 

6.'84 

2. 59 

2. 56 

.03 


.13 

6. 64 

1.07 

1.07 



.04 

12.68 

3.49 

3.49 



.02 

5. 12 

1. 69 

1. 69 



.08 

9. 22 

2.28 

2.28 



.16 

6. 67 

.77 

.58 

.13 

.06 

.07 

7. 36 

.76 

.62 

.09 

.05 

.38 

3. 99 

.81 

.63 

.12 

.06 


19.29 

2.05 

1.29 

.68 

.08 

.10 

8.94 

9.12 

7.57 

.88 

.67 

.10 

17. 53 

7. 60 

5.89 

1.17 

.54 

.08 

7. 61 

9. 39 

7.54 

1.34 

.51 

.13 

10.97 

10. 66 

9.20 

1.00 

.46 

.04 

18. 29 

7.42 

6.05 

.93 

.44 

.33 

10.19 

13. 73 

11.83 

1. 77 

.13 

.11 

12. 63 

6. 42 

5. 56 

.69 

.17 

.08 

12. 82 

7. 76 

5.51 

2.18 

.07 

I*. 11 

11.25 

6. 61 

5. 62 

.80 

.19 

.15 

19.01 

8.01 

6.58 

1. 25 

.18 



1 Based on total population of areas estimated from U. S. censuses of 1930 
^ucl 1940 

» See app. A for the territory and total population included in each urban 
area. Amounts per inhabitant based on figures which relate to territory 
other than that shown in app. A are footnoted. _ . ^ 

3 Excludes cost of administration; of materials, equipment, and otner items 
incident to operation of work programs; and of transient care. 

1 Includes statutory aid to veterans administered on basis of need. 

* Figures not available. 

0 Terminated in 1934. . . j 

^ Figures from the WPA, Division of Statistics; represent ear^gs of all 
persons employed on projects operated by the WPA withm these ^r^s, 
figures are not available for earnings of persons employed on projects otner 
than those operated hy the WPA. 


8 Includes figures lor areas m siaies wiuu ‘juv.ai 

Security Board and for areas in States not participatmg under the Social 
Security Act. , 

* Includes direct and work relief and aid to veterans. 

10 Based on number of areas reporting expenditures for specified type of aid. 

11 Figure on which this amount is based is more inclusive than those pub¬ 
lished for 1929-38 in that it contains an estimate for annual expenditures of 
30 agencies unable to report monthly figures. 

12 At the beginning of 1939, reporting area was changed from city to county. 

13 Less than 1 cent. 

u Relates to city. . .... ^ . * k* • 

n Figure on which this amount is based is incomplete since data not obtam- 

able for 1 relief program. 


163 


















































































































































Table l)-7 .—Amount per inhabitant ' of public and private assistance and earnings under specified Federal work 

programs, by urban area, 1940 


Public funds 


Geographic division, State, 
and urban area * 

Total 

public 

and 


General relief * 

Earnings 
eral work 

private 
funds * 

Total 

Total 

Direct 
relief * 

Work 
relief ‘ 

Civil 

Works 

Program® 

Median .. 

$19.15 

$19.03 

$3.56 




New England 










Connecticut: 

Bridgeport_ 

14.87 

14.67 

3.82 




Hartford___ 

19.02 

18.09 

6. 87 




New Britain_ 

12.03 

11.93 

1.64 




New Haven__ 

20.18 

19.87 

5.35 




Maine: Portland_ 

17.03 

16.82 

3.07 




Massachusetts: 

Boston___ 

39.64 

38.45 

7.39 




Brockton.. 

40.37 

39. 73 

7.75 




Cambridge_ 

29.84 

29.47 

9.30 




Fall River_ 

28.96 

28.93 

8.15 




Lawrence-- _ 

25.68 

25.53 

5.25 




Lowell__ 

37.11 

36.86 

7.86 




Lynn... ... .. . 

33.63 

33. 26 

6.94 




Malden__ 

26. 56 

26. 53 

8.13 




New Bedford_ 

30.47 

30.33 

5.76 




Newton___ 

14.38 

14.07 

4.68 




Springfield_ 

27.81 

27.62 

7.78 




Worcester____ 

26.65 

26.40 

8.14 




Rhode Island: Providence_ 

22.13 

21.84 

7.29 




Middle Atlantic 







New Jersey: 

Jersey City.. 

11.29 

11.27 

4.44 




Newark___ 

26. 74 

26.63 

10.72 




Trenton... 

16.20 

16.02 

3.98 




New York: 

Albany... 

10.36 

10.19 

3.66 




Buffalo.- _ . ... 

19.08 

18.87 

10.23 




New Rochelle-. 

18.85 

18.74 

11.60 

- 



New York_ 

26.37 

26.03 

9.77 




Niagara Falls-... 

13.91 

13.75 

7. 72 




Rochester_ 

23.69 

23.55 

12.69 




Syracuse ___ 

18.68 

18.52 

8.77 




Utica.... 

18.12 

17.84 

7.34 




Yonkers..__ 

20.00 

19.86 

8.65 




Pennsylvania: 

Allentown___ 

12.70 

12.64 

1.63 




Altoona.... 

24.25 

24.24 

3.72 




Bethlehem_ .. 

14.96 

14.91 

1.94 




Chester_ 

8.70 

8.63 

1.18 




Erie___ 

19.58 

19.57 

4.31 




Johnstown.. __ 

19.21 

19.19 

3.55 




Philadelphia.-.. 

25.19 

21.93 

10. 61 




Pittsburgh .. 

24.38 

24. 22 

8.03 




Reading... 

18.88 

18.81 

2. 95 




Scranton___ 

34.63 

34.49 

14. 51 




Wilkes-Barre.. 

30.02 

29.97 

11.68 




North Central 





Illinois: 

Chicago... 

23. 47 

23.22 

7.79 




Springfield_ 

28.15 

27.94 

5.25 




Indiana: 

Evansville .... 

25.31 

25.23 

5.32 




Fort Wavne.. .. 

17.00 

16.84 

2.16 




Indianapolis... 

18.19 

18.00 

2.50 




South Bend_ 

17.94 

17.90 

3. 56 




Terre Haute.... 

34.15 

34.01 

3.39 




Iowa: 

Des Moines_ 

30.18 

30.12 

4.75 




Sioux City_ 

23. 52 

23. 44 

7.05 




Kansas: 

Kansas City... 

21.41 

21.38 

2.72 




Topeka__.•_ 

16.95 

16.80 

1.53 




Wichita... 

18.67 

18.61 

5.76 




Michigan: 

Detroit_ 

19.49 

19.39 

4.84 




Flint___ 

15.86 

15.85 

2.09 




Grand Rapids. _ 

20.65 

20.62 

2.89 




Pontiac___ 

10.61 

10.60 

1.40 




Saginaw_ 

14.42 

14.36 

1.89 




Minnesota: 

Duluth__ 

36.73 

36.46 

9.50 




Minneapolis_ 

27.18 

27.03 

6.91 




St. Paul__ 

25.25 

25.06 

8.12 




Missouri: 

Kansas City___ 

19.53 

19.29 

2.30 




St. Louis...... 

15.15 

14.92 

1.53 




Nebraska: Omaha.__ 

23.60 1 

23.15 

.94 





Special types of public assistance * 


Private 


Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA 7 

Total 

Old-age 

assistance 

Aid to de¬ 
pendent 
children 

Aid to the 
blind 

lunas• 

$10.01 

$4.49 

$3.02 

$1.17 

$0.10 

$0.13 

7. 30 

3. 55 

2.92 

.58 

.05 

.20 

6. 62 

4.60 

4.04 

.49 

.07 

.93 

7.49 

2.80 

2.31 

.47 

.02 

.10 

9.83 

4. 69 

4.03 

.58 

.08 

.31 

9.56 

4.19 

3. 26 

.72 

.21 

.21 

19.97 

11.09 

7.03 

3.93 

.13 

1.19 

18. 52 

13.46 

11.71 

1.66 

.09 

.64 

12.28 

7.89 

5.16 

2.63 

.10 

.37 

13.23 

7.55 

6.15 

1.31 

.09 

.03 

12.76 

7. 52 

6. 58 

.86 

.08 

■ .15 

18. 76 

10.24 

8.30 

1.84 

.10 

.25 

15.32 

11.00 

9.58 

1.33 

.09 

.37 

10.11 

8.29 

6.78 

1.45 

.06 

.03 

14.25 

10. 32 

8.80 

1.41 

.11 

.14 

4.45 

4.94 

3.42 

1.49 

.03 

.31 

10.84 

9.00 

6. 98 

1.94 

.08 

.19 

10.23 

8.03 

6.18 

1.80 

.05 

.25 

10.66 

3.89 

2.88 

.98 

.03 

.29 

4.64 

2.19 

1.09 

1.05 

.05 

.02 

12.24 

3. 67 

1.81 

1.79 

.07 

.11 

8.89 

3.15 

1.73 

1.34 

.08 

.18 

4. 34 

3.19' 

1.60 

.51 

.08 

.17 

6.00 

2.64 

1.64 

.95 

.05 

.21 

2. 66 

4. 48 

2. 62 

1.86 

(») 

.11 

11.89 

4.37 

2.45 

1.85 

.07 

H.34 

3.40 

2. 63 

1.40 

1.21 

.02 

.16 

4.71 

6.15 

4.54 

1.51 

.10 

.14 

5.64 

4.11 

3.19 

.87 

.05 

.16 

5.14 

5.36 

3.74 

1.58 

.04 

.28 

7.82 

3.39 

1.73 

1.62 

.04 

.14 

8.25 

2.76 

1.60 

.76 

.40 

.06 

15.16 

5.36 

2.79 

1.99 

.58 

.01 

9.89 

3.08 

1.79 

.90 

.39 

.05 

5.08 

2.37 

1.32 

.75 

.30 

.07 

9.64 

5.62 

3.43 

1.65 

.54 

.01 

11.32 

4.32 

2.07 

1.83 

.42 

.02 

8.05 

6. 27 

3.07 

2.74 

.46 

.26 

11.69 

4.50 

2.42 

1.75 

.33 

.16 

12.47 

3.39 

2.13 

.78 

.48 

.07 

14. 56 

5.42 

2.80 

2.17 

.45 

.14 

13.65 

4.64 

2. 21 

2.00 

.43 

.05 

11.47 

3.96 

3.52 

.23 

.21 

.25 

17.09 

5.60 

5.04 

.19 

.37 

.21 

13.78 

6.13 

3.87 

2.12 

.14 

.08 

9.45 

5.23 

3. 46 

1.66 

.11 

.16 

9.95 

5. 55 

3. .53 

1.85 

.17 

.19 

9. 72 

4. 62 

3.00 

1.54 

.08 

.04 

20. 92 

9.70 

6.85 

2. 59 

.26 

.14 

18.96 

6.41 

5.81 

.25 

.35 

.06 

10.30 

6.09 

5.36 

.52 

.21 

.08 

14. 58 

4.08 

2.67 

1.26 

.15 

.03 

11.61 

3.66 

2. 49 

1.02 

.15 

.15 

7.42 

5.43 

3.66 

1.60 

.17 

.06 

11.04 

3 51 

1.47 

2.01 

.03 

.10 

9.52 

4.24 

2.82 

1.39 

.03 

.01 

11.28 

6. 45 

5.01 

1.36 

.08 

.03 

5.64 

3. 56 

2.33 

1.19 

.04 

.01 

8.10 

4.37 

2.65 

1.67 

.05 

.06 

18.69 

8.27 

6.00 

2.11 

.16 

.27 

12.80 

7.32 

6.03 

1.17 

.12 

.15 

11.47 

5.47 

4.27 

1.07 

.13 

.19 

11.97 

5.02 

4.30 

.48 

.24 

.24 

10.05 

3.34 

2. 49 

.68 

.17 

.23 

16.13 

6.08 

4.06 

1.90 

.12 

.45 


See footnotes at end of table. 


164 



































































































































































Table D-7. Amount per inhabitant i of public and private assistance and earnings under specified Federal work 

programs, by urban area, 1940 —Continued 


Geographic division. State, 
and urban area * 

Total 
public 
and 
private 
funds 3 


Total 

G 

Total 

North Central—C on. 




Ohio; 




Akron_ , 

$27. 54 

$27.44 

$3.83 

Canton___ 

17.16 

17. 15 

1. 79 

Cincinnati_ 

19. 48 

19. 19 

4.71 

Cleveland_ 

27.15 

26. 77 

6.10 

Columbus_ 

22.90 

22. 84 

3. 46 

Dayton.__ 

19.85 

19. 78 

3. 96 

Springfield_ 

18.49 

18. 37 

1.03 

Toledo ... 

26. 03 

26.01 

3.24 

Yoimgstown_ . 

16.58 

16. 55 

2. 33 

Wisconsin: 




Kenosha.... 

32.63 

32.60 

7.95 

Madison_ 

22.91 

22.89 

3.65 

Milwaukee.. 

27. 72 

27. 55 

7.72 

Racine... 

20.58 

20.48 

6.08 

South Atlantic and South 




Central 




Alabama: 




Birmingham_ 

11.04 

11.03 

.21 

Mobile_ 

10. 74 

10.70 

.08 

Delaware: W'ilmington .. 

11.47 

11.28 

1. 77 

Dist. of Col.: Washington_ 

14.08 

13. 79 

.95 

Florida; 




Jacksonville__ 

17.55 

17.50 

.34 

Miami___ 

6.13 

5.84 

.28 

Georgia: Atlanta “_ 

12.29 

12.13 

.56 

Kentucky: Louisville_ 

8.60 

8.41 

. 77 

Louisiana; 




New Orleans.... 

2.3.23 

22.98 

1.24 

Shreveport...... 

5.09 

6.07 

.77 

Maryland: Baltimore..._ 

10.83 

10.61 

2.39 

North Carolina: 




AsheviUe__ 

13. 75 

13. 75 

.35 

Charlotte_ 

8.00 

7. 95 

.40 

Greensboro... 

7.23 

7.23 

.22 

Winston-Salem_ 

11.53 

11.15 

.78 

Oklahoma: Tulsa..__ 

12.92 

12. 54 

.37 

South Carolina: Charleston... 

16.95 

16.90 

.26 

Tennessee; 




Knoxville_ .. 

11.99 

11.99 

.19 

Memphis__ 

9.80 

9. 66 

.10 

Nashville. 

11.17 

11.02 

.14 

Texas: 




Dallas____ 

9. 52 

9. 40 

.48 

El Paso___ 

8. 06 

8.02 

.03 

Fort Worth_ 

16.42 

16.40 

.74 

Houston_ 

6. 78 

6.70 

.50 

San Antonio__ 

11.15 

11.00 


Virginia; 




Norfolk... 

7.95 

7.85 

.33 

Richmond_ 

11. 39 

11.03 

1.02 

Roanoke_ 

4.88 

4.88 

.42 

West Virginia: Huntington... 

15.99 

15.92 

1.05 

Mountain and Pacific 




California: 




Los Angeles___ 

25.09 

24.99 

6.60 

Oakland_ 

28. 97 

28.89 

4.90 

Sacramento__ 

21.22 

21.10 

2.54 

San Diego__ 

27. 42 

27. 38 

4. 49 

San Francisco.. 

30.23 

29. 83 

6.02 

Colorado: Denver__ 

29. 21 

29.10 

2.61 

Oregon: Portland_ 

19. 94 

19.87 

3. 09 

Utah: Salt Lake City..... 

23. 82 

23.70 

3.80 

Washington: 




Seattle_ 

18.01 

17.91 

2.52 

Taeoma.. 

24.32 

24. 32 

1.74 


Public funds 


General relief * 


Direct 
relief * 

Work 
relief ‘ 

Civil 

Works 

Program® 






























































































































































Earnings under Fed 
eral work programs 


Special types of public assistance * 


Projects 
operated 
by the 
WPA ' 

Total 

Old-age 

assistance 

Aid to de¬ 
pendent 
ehildren 

Aid to the 
blind 

funds * 

$20. 02 

$3. 59 

$3.03 

$0.50 

$0.06 

$0.10 

9.96 

5.40 

4.69 

.61 

. 10 

.01 

9. 79 

4.81 

4.01 

.70 

.10 

.29 

17.07 

3.60 

2. 48 

1.03 

.09 

.38 

12. 92 

6. 46 

5.68 

.58 

.20 

.06 

9. 67 

6.03 

5. 40 

.53 

.10 

.07 

9. 70 

7.64 

6.91 

.56 

.17 

.12 

17. 18 

5. 59 

4.88 

.56 

.15 

.02 

10. 73 

3. 49 

2.73 

.59 

.17 

.03 

15.75 

8.90 

5.30 

3.35 

.25 

.03 

12.05 

7.19 

4.56 

2.53 

.10 

.02 

14.33 

5.50 

3.68 

1.67 

.15 

.17 

8.76 

6.64 

3.88 

2.64 

.12 

.10 

9.64 

1.18 

.57 

.59 

.02 

.01 

9.81 

.81 

.64 

.16 

.01 

.04 

7. 59 

1.92 

1.21 

.71 


.19 

10.56 

2.28 

1.55 

.63 

.10 

.29 

13.88 

3.28 

2. 59 

.51 

.18 

.05 

3.39 

2.17 

1.57 

..50 

.10 

.29 

10.40 

1.17 

.67 

.45 

.05 

.16 

6.12 

1. 52 

1.17 

.35 


.19 

17.34 

4.40 

1. 74 

2.52 

.14 

.25 

1.45 

2.85 

1.45 

1. 35 

.05 

.02 

3. 92 

4.30 

2.28 

1.89 

.13 

.22 

11.12 

2.28 

1.50 

.68 

.10 


5. 44 

2.11 

1.40 

.60 

.11 

.05 

4. 94 

2.07 

1.30 

.67 

.10 

(“) 

8.22 

2.15 

1.38 

.68 

.09 

.38 

6. 27 

6.90 

5. 46 

1.26 

.18 

.38 

15.24 

1. 40 

.91 

.42 

.07 

.05 

9.15 

2.65 

1. 21 

1.39 

.05 


6.90 

2.66 

1.71 

.85 

.10 

.14 

7.55 

3.33 

1.95 

1.26 

.12 

.15 

6. 42 

2.50 

2.48 

.02 


.12 

7.11 

.88 

.88 



04 

12.50 

3.16 

3.16 




4.68 

1.52 

1. 52 



,o« 

8.68 

2. 32 

2.32 



, IK 

6.25 

1.27 

.85 

.35 

.07 

.10 

8. 67 

1. 34 

.87 

.40 

.07 

.36 

3.18 

1.28 

.84 

.36 

.08 


12.62 

2.25 

1.41 

.74 

.10 

.07 

7.28 

11.21 

9.49 

1.01 

.71 

.10 

14.93 

9.06 

7.27 

1.22 

.57 

.08 

7.26 

11. 30 

9.28 

1. 51 

.51 

.12 

9.39 

13.50 

11.63 

1.34 

.53 

.04 

14.41 

9.40 

7.85 

1.06 

.49 

.40 

10.59 

15.90 

13. 61 

2.13 

.16 

.11 

10.33 

6.45 

5. 47 

.82 

.16 

.07 

11.23 

8.67 

5.97 

2.61 

.09 

i«.12 

8.61 

» 6.78 

5.69 

.89 

.20 

.10 

14.66 

7.92 

6.57 

1.17 

. 18 



Private 


‘ Based on total population of areas according to TJ. S. census of 1940. 

* See app. A for the territory and total population included in each urban 
area. Amounts per inhabitant based on figures which relate to territory 
other than that shown in app. A are footnoted. 

3 Excludes cost of administration; of materials, equipment, and other 
items incident to operation of work programs; and of transient care. Figures 
on which amounts per inhabitant for assistance programs are based differ 
from those published for previous years in that they include obligations 
incurred for burials, in addition to obligations incurred for money payments, 
assistance in kind, medical care, and hospitalization. 

♦ Includes statutory aid to veterans administered on basis of need. See 
also footnote 2. 

‘ Figures not available. 

' Terminated in 1934. 

^ Figures from the WPA, Division of Statistics; represent earnings of all 
persons employed on projects operated by the WPA within these areas; 


figures are not available for earnings of persons employed on projects other 
than those operated by the WPA. 

* Includes figures for areas in States with plans approved by the Social 
Security Board and for areas in States not participating under the Social 
Security Act. See also footnote 2. 

«Includes direct and work relief and aid to veterans. See also footnote 2. 

1° Based on number of areas reporting expenditures for specified type of aid. 

n Less than 1 cent. 

Figure on which this amount is based is more inclusive than those pub¬ 
lished for 1929-38 in that it contains an estimate for annual expenditures of 
30 agencies unable to report monthly figures. 

n At the beginning of 1939 reporting area was changed from city to county. 

At the beginning of 1940 reporting area was changed to Fulton County 
and all De Kalb County. 

1* Figure on which this amount is based is incomplete since data not ob¬ 
tainable for 1 relief program. 


165 
















































































































































INDEX TO CHARTS FOR URRAN AREAS 


Page 

Akron, Ohio_ 65 

Albany, New York_ 55 

Allentown, Pennsylvania_ 56 

Altoona, Pennsylvania_ 56 

Asheville, North Carolina_ 73 

Atlanta, Georgia__ 69 

Baltimore, Maryland_ 70 

Bethlehem, Pennsylvania_ 56 

Birmingham, Alabama_ 69 

Boston, Massachusetts_ 50 

Bridgeport, Connecticut_ 49 

Brockton, Massachusetts_,_ 50 

Buffalo, New York_ 55 

Cambridge, Massachusetts_ 50 

Canton, Ohio_ 65 

Charleston, South Carolina_ 75 

Charlotte, North Carolina_ 75 

Chester, Pennsylvania_ 57 

Chicago, Illinois_ 59 

Cincinnati, Ohio_ 65 

Cleveland, Ohio_ 66 

Columbus, Ohio_ 65 

Dallas, Texas_ 77 

Dayton, Ohio_ 66 

Denver, Colorado_ 82 

Des Moines, Iowa_ 60 

Detroit, Michigan_._ 62 

Duluth, Minnesota_ 63 

El Paso, Texas_ 77 

Erie, Pennsylvania_ 57 

Evansville, Indiana_ 59 

Fall River, Massachusetts_ 51 

Flint, Michigan_ 62 

Fort Wayne, Indiana_ 59 

Fort Worth, Texas_ 78 

Grand Rapids, Michigan_ 62 

Greensboro, North Carolina_ 74 

Hartford, Connecticut_ 49 

Houston, Texas- 78 

Huntington, West Virginia_ 80 

Indianapolis, Indiana_ 60 

Jacksonville, Florida- 71 

Jersey City, New Jersey- 54 

Johnstown, Pennsylvania- 58 

Kansas City, Kansas_ 61 

Kansas City, Missouri_ 64 

Kenosha, Wisconsin_ 68 

Knoxville, Tennessee- 76 

Lawrence, Massachusetts_ 51 

Los Angeles, California-:- 81 

Louisville, Kentucky- 80 

Lowell, Massachusetts_ 51 

Lynn, Massachusetts_ 51 

Madison, Wisconsin_ 67 

Malden, Massachusetts_ 52 

Memphis, Tennessee_ 76 

Miami, Florida_ 71 

Milwaukee, Wisconsin_ 67 


Page 


Minneapolis, Minnesota_ 63 

Mobile, Alabama_ 69 

Nashville, Tennessee_ 75 

New Bedford, Massachusetts_ 52 

New Britain, Connecticut_ 49 

New Haven, Connecticut_ 49 

New Orleans, Louisiana_ 72 

New Rochelle, New York_ 55 

New York, New York_ 54 

Newark, New Jersey_ 54 

Newton, Massachusetts_ 52 

Niagara Falls, New York_ 54 

Norfolk, Virginia_ 79 

Oakland, California- 81 

Omaha, Nebraska_ 64 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania_ 57 

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania_ 57 

Pontiac, Michigan_ 63 

Portland, Maine_ 50 

% 

Portland, Oregon_ 82 

Providence, Rhode Island_ 53 

Racine, Wisconsin_ 68 

Reading, Pennsylvania_ 58 

Richmond, Virginia_ 79 

Roanoke, Virginia_ 80 

Rochester, New York_ 55 

Sacramento, California_ 81 

Saginaw, Michigan_ 63 

St. Louis, Missouri_ 64 

St. Paul, Minnesota_ 64 

Salt Lake City, Utah_ 82 

San Antonio, Texas_ 78 

San Diego, California_ 81 

San Francisco, California_ 82 

Scranton, Pennsylvania_ 58 

Seattle, Washington_ 83 

Shreveport, Louisiana_ 72 

Sioux City, Iowa_ 61 

South Bend, Indiana_ 60 

Springfield, Illinois__ 59 

Springfield, Massachusetts_ 52 

Springfield, Ohio_ 66 

Syracuse, New York_ 55 

Tacoma, Washington_ 83 

Terre Haute, Indiana_ 60 

Toledo, Ohio_ 66 

Topeka, Kansas_ 61 

Trenton, New Jersey_ 54 

Tulsa, Oklahoma_ 72 

Utica, New York_ 56 

Washington, D. C_ 70 

Wichita, Kansas_ 61 

Wilkes-Barre, Pennsylvania_ 58 

Wilmington, Delaware_ 70 

Winston-Salem, North Carolina_ 74 

Worcester, Massachusetts_ 53 

Yonkers, New York __ 54 

Youngstown, Ohio_ 67 


166 























































































































PUBLIC 

ASSISTANCE 

1941 



FEDERAL SECURITY AGENCY 

SOCIAL SECIJIIITY BOARD 

RUREAU OF PUDLIC ASSISTANCE 

PuEilic Assistance Report No. 4 


Preprinted From Social Security Yearbook, 1941 














FOREWORD 


This publication, which is preprinted from Social Security Yearbook, 1941, 
is the fourth in a series of yearly analyses of public assistance in the United 
States. It summarizes monthly data fimnished by State and Federal 
agencies responsible for the operation of one or more programs and issued 
periodically in the Social Security Bulletin, and shows in perspective the 
development of the public assistance programs under the Social Secmdty 
Act by the inclusion of data for Federal work programs and other forms 
of public aid. 

The present report lays particular emphasis on changes in the numbers 
of recipients of old-age assistance, aid to the blind, aid to dependent chil¬ 
dren, and general relief in 1941, and the effect of the rising cost of living? 
administrative policies, and availability of fimds on levels of payments. 
This report also presents a summary of trends in financing these programs 
during the period 1930-41, with an analysis of changes in Federal, State, 
and local responsibility for meeting the costs of public aid. An accom¬ 
panying analysis summarizes eligibility requirements for receipt of public 
assistance as of December 1941 under State plans approved by the Social 
Secmity Board, with notation of 1941 amendments to State laws. 

The earlier summaries published by the Social Security Board appeared 
as "Tabular Summary of Statistics of Public Assistance under the Social 
Security Act for the Calendar Year 1937” (Bureau of Research and Sta¬ 
tistics Report No. 1), "Trends in Public Assistance, 1933-1939” (Bureau 
of Research and Statistics Report No. 8), and "Public Assistance, 1940” 
(Public Assistance Report No. 1). 

Jane M. Hoey, Director, 

May 1942. Bureau of Public Assistance. 


\ 


CONTENTS 


Public Aid in 1941. 

Federal work programs. ^ 

Public assistance programs. ^ 

Changes in coverage of special types of assistance. . 5 

New Federal-State programs. ^ 

Liberalization in eligibility provisions . g 

Increase in Federal matching. g 

Increase in State and local funds. g 

State variations . ^ 

Applications and case closings. jq 

Changes in coverage of general relief. jq 

State trends. ^ j 

Changes in assistance payments. J 2 

Adjustments of payments to increased cost of living. 12 

Influence of prescribed maximums. 1 ^ 

Administrative limitations. Ig 

Influence of inadequate funds. 1 ^ 

Trends in Financing Public Aid, 1930-41. 21 

Federal financial responsibility. 21 

State and local financial responsibility. 23 

Financing individual programs. 26 

Old-age assistance. 26 

Aid to dependent children. 26 

Aid to the blind. 27 

General relief. 28 

Eligibility for Public Assistance Under Approved State Plans, as of December 1941. 29 

Conditions relevant to need. 29 

Need as a condition of eligibility. 29 

General definitions of "needy persons”. 3 Q 

Specific income limitations. 3 q 

Real property limitations. 3 j 

Personal property limitations. 32 

Changes in property limitations in 1941. 33 

Disposal of property to qualify for assistance. 34 

Responsibility of relatives and others. 34 

Receipt of two or more types of assistance. 36 

Other eligibility conditions. 37 

Age limitations. 37 

- Residence requirements. 38 

Citizenship requirements. 40 

Institutional status. 41 

Special conditions applicable to aid to dependent children. 42 

Definition of blindness. 44 

Miscellaneous provisions. 44 

CHARTS 

1. —Index of cases receiving general relief in the continental United States and in selected States, Jan- 

uary-December 1941. 12 

2. —Effect of maximums on amounts of payments: Percentage distribution of payments for special types 

of public assistance, by amount, in selected States, November 1941. 14 

3. —Effect of no maximums on amounts of payments: Percentage distribution of payments for special 

types of public assistance, by amount, in selected States, November 1941. 14 

4. —Effect of variations in availability of funds: Percentage distribution of payments for special types 

of public assistance, by amount, in selected States, November 1941. 15 

5. —Public expenditures for assistance and work program earnings in the continental United States, by 

source of funds, calendar years 1930—41. 22 

6 . —Expenditures from State and local funds for assistance in the continental United States, calendar 

years 1930-41. 24 

I 





















































TABLES 


Public Assistance and Federal Work Programs in the Continental United States 

Page 

1. —Summary of assistance, earnings, recipients, and persons employed, 1933-41. 1 

2. —Assistance and earnings, by month, 1941. 2 

3. —Recipients and persons employed, by month, 1941. 2 

4. —Percentage distribution of assistance and earnings by program, for each year, 1933-41. 3 

5. —^Assistance and earnings, by State, 1941. 4 

Special Types of Public Assistance and General Relief 

6. —Old-age assistance: Recipients, by State and month, 1941. 5 

7. —Aid to dependent children: Families receiving aid, by State and month, 1941. 6 

8. —Aid to dependent children: Children receiving aid, by State and month, 1941. 7 

9. —Aid to the blind: Recipients, by State and month, 1941.. 8 

10. —Special types of assistance: Number of States with specified percentage changes in number of 

recipients from December 1940 to December 1941, by program.'. 9 

11. —Special types of assistance: Applications received and cases closed in States with approved plans, 

by program, 1941. 10 

12. -—General relief in the continental United States: Cases receiving assistance, by State and month, 

1941. 11 

13. —Special types of assistance and general relief: Average payment, by State and program, December 

1941. 12 

14. —Special types of assistance and general relief: States in which average payment increased or de¬ 
creased by $1 or more from December 1940 to December 1941, by program. 13 

15. —Old-age assistance: Payments to recipients, by State and month, 1941. 16 

16. —Aid to dependent children: Payments to recipients, by State and month, 1941. 17 

17. —Aid to the blind: Payments to recipients, by State and month, 1941. 18 

18. —General relief in the continental United States: Payments to cases, by State and month, 1941... 19 

Source of Funds for Public Assistance and Federal Work Programs 

19. —Public expenditures for assistance and work program earnings in the continental United States, by 

source of funds, calendar years 1930-41. 21 

20. —Expenditures from Federal funds for assistance and work program earnings in the continental 

United States, by program, calendar years 1930-41. 23 

21. —Expenditures from State and local funds for assistance in the continental United States, calendar 

years 1930-41. 23 

22. —Expenditures from State funds for assistance in the continental United States, by program, calendar 

years 1930—41. 25 

23. —Expenditures from local funds for assistance in the continental United States, by program, calendar 

years 1930-41. 25 

24. —Public expenditures for old-age assistance in the continental United States, by source of funds, 

calendar years 1930—41. 26 

25. —Public expenditures for aid to dependent children in the continental United States, by source of 

funds, calendar years 1930-41. 26 

26. —Public expenditures for aid to the blind in the continental United States, by source of funds, 

calendar years 1930—41. 27 

27. —Public expenditures for general relief in the continental United States, by source of funds, calendar 

years 1930-41. 28 

Eligibility Requirements for Special Types of Public Assistance Under 

Approved State Plans 

28. —Requirements relating to disposal of property to qualify, by State and program, December 1941. . 35 

29. —Age requirements, by State and program, December 1941. 37 

30. —Residence requirements, by State and program, December 1941. 39 

31. —Citizenship requirements for old-age assistance and aid to the blind, by State, December 1941. .. 41 


II 






































Public Aid in 1941* * 


During 1941 expanding employment and the 
rising cost of living exerted marked influence on 
the trends in public aid. With the growth of 
defense production the number of persons in the 


United States dependent upon public aid declined, 
but individual payments to persons on the rolls 
tended to rise, partially compensating for in¬ 
creasing living costs. There have been sharp 
variations in the effect of the defense economy on 


'Prepared in the Division of Assistance Analysis. 


Table 1 .—Public assistance and Federal work programs in the continental United States: Summary of assistance^ 

earnings, recipients, and persons employed, 1933—41 * 


[In thousands; corrected to Feb. 15, 1942] 


Program 


Total assistance and earnings_ 

Total assistance..-. 

Old-age assistance--- 

Aid to dependent children.. 

Aid to the blind... 

General relief *-- 

Relief under special programs of the Fed¬ 
eral Emergency Relief Administra¬ 
tion 8___ 

Subsistence payments certified by the 

Farm Security Administration * - 

Total earnings of persons employed under 

Federal work programs--- 

Civilian Conservation Corps . 

National Youth Administration:« 

Student work program-- 

Out-of-school work program- 

Work Projects Administration *- 

Civil Works Program .. 

Other Federal agency projects financed 
from emergency funds t_ 


Estimated unduplicated total:* 

Households___ 

Persons in these households--- 

Recipients of assistance: 

Old-age assistance—.. 

Aid to dependent children: 

Families- 

Children_ 

Aid to the blind..... 

Cases receiving general relief *-- 

Cases aided under special programs of 
the Federal Emergency Relief Admin¬ 
istration s--- 

Cases for which subsistence payments 
were certified by the Farm Security 
Administration * - 

Persons employed under Federal work pro¬ 
grams: ^ 

Civilian Conservation Corps »- 

National Youth Administration:« 

Student work program—. 

Out-of-school work program. 

Work Projects Administration *- 

Civil Works Program .. 

Other Federal agency projects financed 
from emergency funds t- 


1933 

1934 

1935 

1936 

1937 

1938 

1939 

1940 

1941 

Amount of assistance and earnings, calendar year 

$1,223,329 

$2,380,865 

$2,532,512 

$3,119,013 

$2,653,918 

$3,236,600 

$3,185,447 

$2,723,408 

$2,227,404 

836,919 

1,341,687 

1,665,382 

680,950 

840, 306 

1,007, 566 

1,067,889 

1,053,266 

1,002,668 

26,071 

32, 244 

64,966 

155,241 

310,442 

392, 384 

430,480 

474,952 

541,479 

40,504 

40, 686 

41,727 

49,654 

70, 451 

97,442 

114,949 

133,243 

153,138 

5,839 

7,073 

7,970 

12,813 

16,171 

18,958 

20,752 

21,826 

22,901 

758,752 

1,200,615 

1,433,182 

439,004 

406,881 

476,203 

482,653 

404,963 

272,869 

6,753 

61,069 

114,996 

3,873 

467 





2,541 

20,365 

35,894 

22,579 

19,055 

18,282 

12,281 

386,410 

1,039,178 

867,130 

2,438,063 

1,813,612 

2, 229,034 

2,117,558 

1,670,142 

1,224,736 

140,736 

260,957 

332,851 

292, 397 

245,756 

230,318 

230,513 

215,846 

155,604 



6,364 

26, 329 

24,287 

19, 598 

22,707 

26,864 

25,128 




28,883 

32,664 

41, 560 

51,538 

65,211 

94,032 



238,018 

1, 592,039 

1,186, 266 

1,751,053 

1,565,515 

1,269,617 

937,068 

?!14 Q'ifi 

503,060 








30,718 

275,161 

289,897 

498,415 

324,639 

186,505 

247,285 

92,604 

»12,904 


Number of recipients and persons employed, December 


7,164 

6,706 

6,007 

5,835 

5,169 

6,954 

5,907 

6,362 

4,147 

25,375 

24,122 

20,764 

18,602 

15,460 

21,286 

16,861 

14,807 

10,370 

107 

206 

378 

1,106 

1,577 

1,776 

1,909 

2,066 

2,234 

112 

113 

117 

162 

228 

280 

315 

370 

390 

285 

280 

286 

404 

565 

684 

760 

891 

941 

25 

33 

35 

45 

56 

67 

70 

73 

77 

3,246 

5,368 

2,886 

1,510 

1,626 

1,631 

1,668 

1,239 

798 


^59 

96 

11 








130 

135 

109 

116 

96 

46 

26 

290 

330 

459 

328 

284 

276 

266 

246 

126 



283 

411 

304 

372 

434 

449 

337 




178 

136 

240 

296 

32 t) 

283 



2,^7 

2,243 

1,594 

3,156 

2,109 

1,826 

1,023 

3 f ^97 

264 

331 

408 

506 

235 

167 

141 

22 

«2 


1 Data partly estimated and subject to revision. For definitions of terms 
see 1940 Yearbook, pp. 309-311; Public Assistance, 1940 (preprinted from 1940 
Y^rbook), pp. 3^1; or Social Security Bulletin Vol. 4 No. 9 (September 
1941), pp. 50-52. For monthly data see ^ctal ^curity 
No 2 (February 1941), pp. 66-70, and Vol. 6, No. 2 (February 1942), pp. 26-29. 

> Data for January 1933-March 1937 from the WPA. 

* Data from the WPA. 

» Data from the CC^. Beginning July 1941, earnings of persons enrolled 
estimated by the CCC by multiplying average monthly numter of prsons 
trolled by average of $67.20 for each month for enrollees other than Indians 
and $60.50 for Indians, 


»Data for September 1935-June 1939 from the WPA; for subsequent months 
from the NYA. Beginning July 1941, data for persons employed on out^f- 
school work program based on average of weekly employment counts during 

™?Data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics; excludes employment and 
earnings on projects financed from Reconstruction Finance Corporation 

^'^Be’ginning October 1941, represents employment and earnings on projects 
financed from Public Works Administration funds omy. Data not available 
for other Federal agency projects financed under emergency relief appropria¬ 
tion acts, but latest available reports show monthly employment of approxi¬ 
mately 1,000 and monthly earnings of approximately $100,000. 

« Estimated by the WPA and the Social Security Board. 


1 












































































2 


■Table 2.—Public assistance and Federal work programs in the continental United States: Assistance and earnings, 

by month, 1941 ' 

[In thousands: corrected to Feb. 15,1942] 


Month 

Totals 

Assistance to recipients 

Earnings of persons employed under Federal work pro¬ 
grams 

Earnings 

on 

regular 

Federal 

construc¬ 

tion 

projects 

Special types of public assist¬ 
ance 

General 

relief 

Snbsistence 
payments 
certified 
by the 
Farm 
Security 
Adminis¬ 
tration 

Civilian 

Conser¬ 

vation 

Corps 

National Youth ' 
Adminstration 

Work 

Projects 

Admin¬ 

istration 

Other 

Federal 

agency 

projects 

financed 

from 

emergency 

funds 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to 
depend¬ 
ent 

children 

Aid to 
the 
blind 

Student 

work 

program 

Out-of- 

school 

work 

program 

Total.— 

$2,227,404 

$541,479 

$153,138 

$22,901 

$272,869 

$12,281 

$155,604 

$25,128 

$94,032 

$937,068 

$12, 904 

$1,537, 663 

January___ 

222,090 

42, 523 

12.298 

1,868 

30, 555 

1, 543 

17,110 

2,776 

7,901 

103, 526 

1,990 

103, 323 

February.. 

215,115 

43. 001 

13,191 

1,871 

28,883 

1,680 

18,152 

3.165 

9,224 

94, 099 

1,849 

113, 790 

March_ 

216,197 

43, 461 

12, 767 

1,870 

28,769 

2,049 

16.178 

3,283 

8,929 

97. 429 

1, 462 

111, 136 

April . _ 

208, 565 

43. 884 

12,866 

1,885 

26, 279 

1,667 

15,073 

3,352 

8,419 

93. 692 

1.448 

116,152 

May_ 

198, 988 

44,118 

12,858 

1,896 

23,280 

975 

14. 765 

3,385 

8,129 

88, 246 

1,336 

106, 415 

Jime_ 

188, 052 

45, 686 

12,803 

1,896 

20,581 

1,670 

12,902 

2,595 

7,992 

80, 754 

1,173 

110,103 

July... 

167,063 

45,333 

12, 570 

1,889 

19,828 

308 

11,693 

26 

7,164 

67, 332 

920 

119, 282 

August___ 

161,119 

45,693 

12, 573 

1,905 

19,645 

442 

11,430 

1 

7,507 

61.136 

787 

129,808 

September.... 

158,650 

46,188 

12, 562 

1,910 

18, 546 

318 

10.665 

150 

7. 384 

60,285 

642 

137.119 

October..... 

161,400 

46,860 

12, 698 

1,949 

18,591 

372 

9,616 

1,731 

7,115 

61, 974 

>494 

156, 661 

November.. 

160, 392 

47. 226 

12,841 

1,969 

18,438 

509 

9, 572 

2, 363 

7,419 

59. 732 

> 323 

167,074 

December.... 

169, 773 

47, 506 

13, 111 

1,993 

19, 474 

748 

8,448 

2,301 

6, 849 

68, 863 

3 480 

166,800 


1 See footnotes, table 1, p. 1. ' Preliminary; represents earnings on projects financed from PWA 

> Excludes earnings on regular Federal construction projects. fimds only. See footnote 8, table 1, p. 1. 


the several public aid programs which are designed 
to meet the needs of particular groups of persons, 
such as dependent children, youth in school, 
unemployed youth, unemployed adults, needy 
farmers, the blind, the aged, and other needy 
persons. Variations in the extent to which com¬ 
munities participated in the war effort explain to a 
considerable degree wide differences among States 
and localities in the trends in each program. Other 


influences, although minor in determining national 
trends, were major determinants of trends in some 
States and localities. 

In 1941 public aid in the United States totaled 
$2.2 billion (tables 1,2, and 5), representing less 
than 2.5 percent of national income payments. 
The bill for public aid in 1941 declined 18 percent 
from the previous year, while national income pay¬ 
ments rose 21 percent. The share of the national 


Table S.—Public assistance and Federal work programs in the continental United States: Recipients and persons 

employed, by month, 1941 ^ 

[In thousands: corrected to Feb. 15, 1942] 


Month 


Estimated im- 
duplicatedtotaU 


Recipients of assistance 


House¬ 

holds 


Special types of public assistance 


Persons 
in these 
house¬ 
holds 


Old- 

age 

assist¬ 

ance 


Aid to de¬ 
pendent chil¬ 
dren 


Fami¬ 

lies 


ChU- 

dren 


Aid to 
the 
blind 


Cases 
receiv¬ 
ing gen¬ 
eral 
relief 


Cases for 
which sub¬ 
sistence 
payments 
were certi¬ 
fied by the 
Farm Se¬ 
curity Ad¬ 
ministra¬ 
tion 


Persons employed under Federal work 
programs 


Civil¬ 

ian 

Con¬ 

serva¬ 

tion 

Corps 


National Youth 
Administration 


Student 

work 

pro¬ 

gram 


Out-of¬ 

school 

work 

pro¬ 

gram 


Work 

Proj¬ 

ects 

Ad¬ 

minis¬ 

tration 


Other Fed¬ 
eral agency 
projects 
financed 
from 

emergency 

funds 


Persons 
employed 
on regu¬ 
lar Fed¬ 
eral con¬ 
struction 
projects 


January... 

February.. 

March_ 

April.. 

May_ 

June_ 

July_ 

August_ 

September. 

October_ 

November, 

December. 


5,445 
5,458 
5,360 
5,153 
4,913 
4,691 
4,145 
4,040 
4,000 
4,094 
4,136 
4,147 


15,064 
15,060 
14,667 
13,896 
13,048 
12,375 
10,811 
10,412 
10, 231 
10,272 
10,326 
10,370 


2,075 
2,082 
2,108 
2,127 
2,148 
2,167 
2,181 
2,195 
2,205 
2,214 
2,224 
2,234 


376 

383 

387 
391 
393 
391 

388 
386 

384 

385 
385 
390 


908 

924 

935 

942 

944 

942 

935 

931 

926 

928 

928 

941 


73 

1,257 

73 

1,230 

73 

1,210 

74 

1,153 

74 

1,038 

74 

934 

74 

876 

74 

859 

75 

817 

76 

796 

77 

782 

77 

798 


59 

58 

68 

54 

36 

40 

14 

18 

11 

13 

16 

26 


258 

442 

274 

459 

244 

471 

228 

478 

223 

462 

195 

357 

175 

5 

171 

« 

159 

34 

144 

273 

143 

341 

126 

337 


419 

1,858 

482 

1,851 

459 

1,718 

419 

1,575 

392 

1,453 

384 

1,376 

318 

1,025 

315 

1,015 

308 

1,007 

288 

1,009 

303 

1,027 

283 

1,023 


15 

721 

13 

797 

11 

762 

11 

776 

10 

723 

9 

718 

7 

758 

6 

783 

5 

835 

M 

928 

<2 

991 

< 2 

977 


* See footnotes, table 1, p. 1. 

* Excludes persons employed on regular Federal construction projects. 

* Less than 500 persons. 


< Preliminary; represents employment on projects financed from PWA 
funds only. See footnote 8, table 1, p. 1. 















































































3 


income paid for public aid was smaller than that 
of any year during the period 1933^1, m which the 
Federal Government has assumed major responsi¬ 
bility for relief of unemployment and need. 

In December 1941 it is estimated that 4.1 
million households, including roughly 10.4 million 
persons in the continental United States, were 
receiving public assistance or work program earn¬ 
ings (tables 1 and 3), a decrease from the previous 
December of about 23 percent in the estimated 
number of households and of about 30 percent in 
the number of persons directly affected by these 
programs. The 10.4 million persons who were in 
households receiving public assistance or work pro¬ 
gram earnings in the last month of 1941 comprised 
about 8 percent of the population of the United 
States. In February 1934, when relief loads reached 
an aU-time peak, approximately 22 percent of 
the population of the country was in households 
receiving some form of public aid. These figures 
overstate the incidence of dependency, since public 
aid which supplements a family’s income may be 
given in behalf of specified members of a house¬ 
hold while the other members may be self-sup¬ 
porting. It may be assumed, however, that in 
December 1941 not more than 2 persons were 
actually dependent upon public aid for every 5 in 
February 1934. The decline in the incidence of 
dependency may have been even greater because 
it is probable that the proportion of self-supporting 
persons in families receiving public aid was larger 
in December 1941 than in 1934, at the depth of the 
depression. 

Table 4 


Federal Work Programs 

Inasmuch as diminishing expenditures for public 
aid have been related in large measure to increas¬ 
ing opportunities for employment, in 1941 the work 
programs decreased more than the assistance pro¬ 
grams. In each year since 1938, earnings under 
Federal work programs have constituted a declin¬ 
ing proportion of the total volume of public aid in 
the United States. These earnings comprised 55 
percent of total expenditures for public aid in 1941 
as contrasted with 61 percent in 1940 (table 4). 

Despite a reduction of one-third of a billion 
dollars from 1940, Work Projects Administration 
earnings still constituted the largest share of total 
public aid in 1941. The total amount of WPA 
earnings—$937 million—exceeded by nearly 75 
percent payments for old-age assistance, the next 
largest public aid program m terms of cost. In 
December 1941, however, when the program of old- 
age assistance reached a peak and the WPA pro¬ 
gram was at a low point for the year, 1,023,000 
persons were employed on WPA projects and 
2,234,000 persons received old-age assistance in 
the continental United States. Expenditures for 
WPA earnings represented about 42 percent of 
total public aid in 1941 as compared with nearly 47 
percent in 1940. 

Expenditures for earnings of persons enrolled in 
the Civilian Conservation Corps in 1941 amounted 
to $156 million and represented 7 percent of the 
total amount of public aid. Earnings of persons 
employed on other Federal agency projects 
financed from emergency funds declined as a pro- 


.—Public assistance and Federal work programs in the continental United States: Percentage distribution 
of assistance and earnings by program, for each year, 1933-41 * 


Program 

1933 

1934 

1935 

1936 

1937 

1938 

1939 

1940 

1941 

Total assistance and earnings __ 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 


Total assistance_ 

68.4 

56.4 

65.8 

21.8 

31.7 

31.1 

33.5 

38.7 

45.0 










Old-age assistance_ _ _ 

2.1 

1.4 

2.6 

5.0 

11.7 

12.1 

13.5 

17.4 

24.3 

Aid to dependent children _ _ 

3.3 

1.7 

1.6 

1.6 

2.7 

3.0 

3.6 

4.9 

6.9 

Aid to the blind .. _ _ 

.5 

.3 

.3 

.4 

.6 

.6 

.7 

.8 

1.0 

General relief _ 

62.0 

60.4 

56.6 

14.1 

15.3 

14.7 

16.1 

14.9 

12.2 

Relief under special programs of the Federal Emergency 

"Rriliof A Hmini’QtTflfinTi 

.6 

2.6 

4.6 

.1 

(*) 





Subsistence payments certified by the Farm Security 
Adininistratioii_ 

.1 

.6 

1.4 

.7 

.6 

.7 

.6 

Total earnings of persons employed under Federal work 

prngrnmQ . .. . _ 

31.6 

43.6 

34.2 

78.2 

68.3 

68.9 

66.6 

61.3 

55.0 











Civilian ConsGrvation Corps - . _-_ 

11.6 

11.0 

13.1 

9.4 

9.3 

7.1 

7.2 

7.9 

7.0 

National Youth Administration: 

Student work program___ 



.3 

.8 

.9 

.6 

.7 

1.0 

1.1 

Out-of*school work program_ 




.9 

1.2 

1.3 

1.6 

2.4 

4.2 

W^ork Projects Administration_-_-_ 



9.4 

51.1 

44.7 

54.1 

49.2 

46.6 

42.1 

'\^Tr\r>\rC‘ 

17.6 

21.1 








Other Federal agency projects financed from emergency 
funds_-___-___-__ 

2.5 

11.6 

11.4 

16.0 

12.2 

6.8 

7.8 

3.4 

.6 












1 See footnotes, table 1, p. 1. ’ Less than 0.05 percent. 












































4 


portion of the total bill for public aid from 3.4 per¬ 
cent in 1940 to 0.6 percent in 1941. 

Because of the development of defense training 
projects in the out-of-school work program of the 
National Youth Administration, earnings under 
this program increased in 1941 in contrast to de¬ 
clines under the other Federal work programs in¬ 
cluded in the public aid series. At the end of the 


year, 620,000 young persons were employed on the 
student aid and out-of-school work programs of the 
NYA. 

Public Assistance Programs 

Expenditures for old-age assistance, aid to de¬ 
pendent children, and aid to the blind have in¬ 
creased in importance year by year from only 7 


Table 5.—Public assistance and Federal work programs in the continental United States: Assistance and earnings^ 

by State, 1941 * 


[In thousands; corrected to Feb. 15, 1942] 


State 


Total >_ 

Alabama_ 

Arizona_ 

Arkansas__ 

California_ 

Colorado_ 

Connecticut_ 

Delaware_ 

District of Columbia. 

Florida_ 

Georgia__ 

Idaho.. 

Illinois—.. 

Indiana__ 

Iowa.___ 

Kansas_ 

Kentucky_ 

Louisiana_ 

Maine_ 

Maryland_ 

Massachusetts_ 

Michigan_ 

Minnesota__ 

Mississippi-.. 

Missouri. 

Montana.. 

Nebraska__ 

Nevada_ 

New Hampshire_ 

New Jersey__ 

New Mexico_ 

New York... 

North Carolina.. 

North Dakota.. 

Ohio_ 

Oklahoma__ 

Oregon_ 

Pennsylvania_ 

Rhode Island_ 

South Carolina_ 

South Dakota_ 

Tennessee___ 

Texas_ 

Utah_ 

Vermont_ 

Virginia... 

Washington_ 

West Virginia_ 

Wisconsin_ 

Wyoming 


Assistance to recipients 


Earnings of persons employed under Federal work 
programs 


Total > 

Special types of public 
assistance ^ 

Genera 1 
relief 

Subsistence 
payments 
certified by 
the Farm 
Security 
Adminis¬ 
tration 

Civilian 

Conser¬ 

vation 

Corps 

National Youth 
Administration 

Work 

Projects 

Adminis¬ 

tration 

Other Fed¬ 
eral agency 
projects 
financed 
from emer¬ 
gency 
funds 

Earnings 
on regular 
Federal 
con¬ 
struction 
projects 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to de¬ 
pendent 
children 

Aid to 
the blind 

Student 

work 

program 

Out-of¬ 

school 

work 

program 

$2,227,404 

$541,479 

$153,138 

$22,901 

<$272,869 

$12,281 

$155,604 

$25,128 

$94, 032 

$937,068 

$12,904 

$1, 537,663 

33,246 

2, 221 

969 

68 

252 

1,801 

6,495 

502 

2,423 

18, 374 

143 

44,623 

12,133 

3,297 

969 

140 

593 

620 

1,933 

122 

320 

4,106 

32 

4,562 

28,292 

2,377 

1, 033 

124 

245 

154 

7, 217 

305 

1,638 

15,198 

(') 

10,445 

160,002 

69, 502 

8,910 

4,144 

17, 939 

1,381 

3, 726 

1, 554 

3,597 

49,027 

^ 222 

142, 844 

36,402 

17,004 

2,291 

224 

2,008 

188 

1, 531 

291 

825 

11,700 

338 

11, 425 

17,455 

6,976 

653 

74 

3,080 

1 

365 

204 

849 

6,222 

31 

18, 896 

2,585 

348 

243 


234 

2 

130 

30 

176 

1,422 

3 

10, 286 

1,083 

443 

84 

638 


425 

152 

336 

6,549 

576 

30 ', 585 

30, 866 

6,980 

1, 220 

429 

707 

78 

2,765 

290 

1, 217 

17, 916 

263 

30; 954 

34, 412 

5,039 

1,243 

206 

488 

645 

5, 716 

610 

2,730 

17, 654 

80 

29 ; 117 

10, 321 

2,561 

1,104 

76 

288 

144 

516 

140 

417 

5,054 

21 

1,808 

161, 567 

41, 041 

2,692 

3,713 

32,989 

133 

5, 857 

1,486 

5,802 

66,168 

2,688 

62', 408 

64, 042 

15, 082 

6,796 

593 

6,167 

41 

2,297 

659 

2,481 

21, 661 

265 

8 O; 025 

35,838 

14, 284 

79S 

445 

3,889 

41 

1, 344 

491 

1,784 

12, 763 

6 

9, 794 

29, 342 

7,199 

2,413 

361 

2, 473 

186 

1, 804 

474 

1, 356 

13, 055 

20 

11 ; 811 

34,360 

6,195 

189 


565 

217 

6,447 

447 

2,183 

18, 093 

26 

20, 040 

36,208 

5, 637 

4, 932 

250 

2,337 

251 

4,433 

499 

1, 703 

16,165 

(') 

34 ; 506 

12,073 

3, 368 

778 

297 

1, 890 

53 

753 

165 

1, 018 

3, 744 

7 

13 ; 491 

16, 830 

3, 852 

2,433 

173 

1,970 

22 

872 

242 

1,041 

6,053 

172 

45 ; 157 

101, 026 

30.461 

8,634 

334 

12, 625 

3 

2,316 

724 

3,104 

42,658 

167 

73 ; 157 

82,484 

18,160 

10, 374 

362 

10, 032 

180 

3, 878 

971 

3,690 

34, 810 

26 

12,168 

59, 237 

16, 253 

3,847 

316 

6,821 

317 

3, 735 

560 

2,017 

25, 355 

15 

10, 220 

25, 699 

2,808 

307 

119 

32 

549 

5, 301 

382 

1,624 

14, 572 

6 

20, 958 

71, 526 

20,891 

4,377 

1,008 

3, 238 

378 

6,150 

684 

2,781 

3i; 797 

223 

65 754 

12, 969 

3,044 

921 

70 

611 

246 

1,029 

155 

410 

6; 446 

37 

2, 627 

26,096 

6,422 

2,048 

182 

939 

509 

1,413 

327 

974 

12 ; 884 

398 

6, 368 

2,162 

759 

33 

8 

89 

7 

190 

20 

65 

957 

34 

2,634 

7, 512 

1,830 

348 

91 

1, 352 

12 

229 

92 

252 

3, 299 

s 

17 552 

57,815 

8,033 

3,910 

213 

8,110 

9 

2,040 

529 

2,748 

32 ; 022 

198 

77 , 385 

12, 215 

989 

662 

50 

147 

277 

2,303 

119 

400 

6; 735 

543 

6,612 

253, 827 

36,753 

18, 373 

896 

91, 360 

63 

6,532 

2,431 

9,430 

86,879 

1, 111 

69,180 

33,723 

4,622 

1,986 

357 

379 

326 

5,063 

717 

2,691 

17, 554 

27 

37, 419 

11,014 

1,941 

926 

46 

467 

132 

1, 515 

205 

516 

5,264 

3 

1 070 

120,960 

38, 529 

5,585 

967 

11,916 

100 

5, 468 

1, 213 

4,760 

51, 472 

949 

63 463 

48, 913 

16, 582 

3,867 

446 

536 

236 

6, 533 

623 

2,231 

17i806 

53 

Q, 255 

17, 425 

6,439 

1,016 

142 

1,412 

138 

824 

245 

611 

7,570 

28 

25 ’ 1S7 

177, 850 

27, 222 

27,149 

i,907 

30, 512 

95 

9,880 

1,567 

6,260 

69; 941 

317 

82 ’ 354 

9,951 

1, 753 

709 

21 

1,601 

1 

325 

116 

442 

4,925 

66 

2Q, 102 

29, 403 

1,809 

762 

96 

226 

711 

3,140 

401 

1, 350 

17,858 

3 , 050 

3fi' fi21 

13,117 

3,419 

482 

62 

591 

465 

1, 572 

259 

508 

5, 766 

4 

i; ^2 

33,110 

4,864 

3,188 

220 

210 

72 

6,283 

531 

2,090 

15, 517 

135 

Kfi 2^7 

88,958 

28,273 

56 

107 

1,031 

724 

11, 387 

1,322 

5,295 

40, 613 

151 

81 655 

15, 943 

4, 522 

1,986 

57 

1,498 

99 

464 

213 

' 432 

6, 369 

303 

4 ^7 

4,256 

1,156 

255 

41 

376 

19 

147 

71 

223 

1, 969 

819 

21, 047 

2,418 

1,064 

168 

640 

86 

4,637 

546 

1,950 

9 ; 525 

22 

Q4 727 

42,728 

20,989 

2, 262 

422 

2,144 

151 

1,354 

375 

1,229 

13 ; 762 

41 

Fip! 037 

31,674 

3,677 

3,029 

206 

1,487 

57 

3, 874 

343 

1,606 

17 ; 354 

40 

10 835 

67,060 

14, 797 

6,591 

662 

6,880 

238 

3,107 

673 

2,249 

22 ; 930 

31 

()2g 

3,790 

1, 015 

299 

46 

204 

119 

288 

52 

197 

1,533 

38 

2 ; 672 


' See footnotes, table 1, p. 1. 

2 Totals represent sum of unrounded data; exclude earnings on regular 
Federal construction projects. 

s Figures in italics represent programs administered under State laws from 
State and/or local funds without Federal participation; for footnotes to State 
data see tables 15-17, pp. 16-18. 


♦ Partly estimated; does not represent sum of State figures because in 4 
States pajunents for medical care, hospitalization, and/or burial have been 
eMluded arm an estimated amount of payments to cases aided by local 
officials in Rhode Island has been included. For footnotes to State data 
see table 18, p. 19. 

‘ Less than $500. 


















































































5 


percent of all public aid in 1936, when the Social 
Security Act became effective, to almost one-third 
in 1941. Old-age assistance comprised a little less 
than one-fourth of the total expended for assistance 
and work program earnings in 1941; aid to de¬ 
pendent children, about 7 percent; and aid to the 
blind, roughly 1 percent. 

The absence of major natural disasters was pri¬ 
marily responsible for the decline in the size of the 
program of the Farm Security Administration 
providing subsistence payments to farmers. Im¬ 
proved prices of farm products and increasing 
opportunities for off-farm employment also con¬ 
tributed to the decline in cases from about 45,000 
in December 1940 to about 26,000 in December 
1941. 


General relief expenditures in 1941 ranked third 
in magnitude, whereas in the years 1933 to 1935 
such payments ranked first and were laiger than 
those for all other types of public aid combined. 
General relief expenditures constituted only one- 
eighth of all public aid in 1941. 

Changes in Coverage of Special Tfpes 
of Assistance 

In 1941, as in each year since 1936 when the 
first grants-in-aid were made to the States by the 
Social Security Board, increases occurred in the 
total number of recipients of old-age assistance, 
aid to dependent children, and aid to the blind in 
the continental United States and the other juris- 


Table 6.—Old-age assistance: Recipients, by State and month, 1941 


[Corrected to Feb. 15,1942] 


State 

January 

February 

March 

April 

May 

June 

July 

August 

September 

October 

November 

December 

Total *._ 

2,078,402 

2,084,874 

2,110,971 

2,130,645 

2,151, 618 

2,170,489 

2,184,792 

2,198,037 

2,208,098 

2,217,273 

2,227,333 

2,237,386 


Alabama...__ 

20,215 
1,560 
8,548 
26,442 
151, 740 
41,864 
17,493 
2,490 
3,449 
37,785 

41,083 
1,805 
9,123 
142,702 

20,258 
1,563 
8,590 
25,484 
152,614 
41,830 
17,478 
2,452 
3,445 
37,624 

42,009 
1,798 
9,164 

20,274 
1,559 
8,640 
25,603 
153, 594 

20,248 
1,564 
8, 710 
25,803 
154,527 

20,059 
1,573 
8,806 
26,035 
155, 503 

20,086 

20,170 

1,572 

20,259 

20,331 
1,566 

20,332 

20,568 

20,748 
1,568 
9,240 
25,229 
158,723 

Alaska_ 

1, 572 
8,863 
26,046 

1,569 

1,569 

1,670 

Arizona_ 

8,910 
25,935 

8,973 

9,057 

9,113 

9,169 

Arkansas_ 

25,842 

25,634 

25,505 

25,314 

California_ 

156,329 

156,943 

157,723 

158,463 

158,326 

158,402 

Colorado *_ 

42,014 
17, 561 
2,469 
3,450 
37,701 

45,288 
1,789 

42,209 
17, 545 

42,406 

42, 551 

42,600 

42,608 

42,697 

42,762 

42,895 

42,899 

Coimecticut__ 

17,629 
2,497 
3,504 
37,946 

17,636 
2,607 
3,494 
37,688 

17,614 

17,695 
2,480 

17, 594 

2,478 

17,728 

17,758 

17,785 
2,462 

Delaware.._ 

2 ; 439 
3,485 
37,803 

2,484 

2,486 

2,473 

District of Columbia.. 
Florida . 

3,496 
37,774 

3,509 
37,948 

3,503 
38,073 

3,656 
38,277 

3,562 

38,474 

3,560 

38,742 

Georgia_ 

48,104 

50,613 
1,811 

51,742 

52,240 

52,421 

62,637 

52,817 

64,981 

67,359 

Hawaii_ 

1,813 

1,825 

1,842 

1,838 

1,841 

1,826 

1,810 

1,814 

Idaho_ 

9,190 

9,241 

9,257 

9,318 

9,426 

9, 518 

9,569 

9,628 

9,697 

9,724 

Illinois_ 

143,482 

144, 389 

145,159 

146,883 

146,636 

147,280 

148,128 

148, 749 

149,133 

149,146 

149,198 

Indiana_ 

67,275 
66,497 
28,149 

67,149 

67 , no 

67,024 

67,193 

67,236 

67,725 
57,050 

68,134 

68,665 

69,089 

69,412 

69,653 

Iowa_ 

66, 520 

66, 555 
28, 297 

56,670 

66,812 

56,983 

67,087 

57,183 

57,146 

67,197 

67,143 
30,691 

Kansas_ 

28,145 

28,404 

28,625 

28,885 

29,169 

29,443 

29,745 

30,072 

30,355 

Kentucky_ 

64,134 
34, 511 
13,086 

64,019 

55,079 

55,658 

56,420 

67,806 

58,325 

58, 770 

69,261 

59,465 

69,637 

59,924 

Louisiana_ 

34,954 

35,487 

35,992 

36,099 

36,099 

35, 775 

35,636 

35,610 

35,662 

35,753 

35,740 

Maine_ 

12,903 

12,759 

12,756 

12, 591 

12,502 

13,075 

13, 561 

13,969 

14,435 

14,612 

14,905 

Maryland__ 

18,158 

18,105 

18,078 

18,058 

18,012 

17,941 

17,836 
87,046 

17,715 

17,639 

17,588 

17,476 

17,368 

Massachusetts._ 

86,982 
78,721 

86,820 

87,143 

87,174 

87,218 

87,067 

87,212 

87,240 

87,440 

87,544 

87,825 

Michigan_ 

79,738 

81,160 

82,673 

85, 515 

88,768 

90,382 

91,373 

91,937 

92,442 

92,820 

93,123 

■M’innpsnt.ft 

62,918 
25,564 
109,140 

62,842 

62,808 

62,809 

62, 956 

63,081 

63,230 

63,321 

63.426 

63,447 

63,488 

63,561 

Mississippi_ 

25, 701 

26,058 

26,211 

26,409 

26,621 

26, 788 

26,854 

27,147 

27,477 

27,563 

27,695 

Missouri_ 

109,238 

no, 301 

111,692 

112,802 

113,787 

114,211 

115,752 

116,192 

116,676 

117,132 

117,368 

Montana _ 

12,266 
28,550 
2,303 

12,261 

12,328 

12,370 

12,448 

12,464 

12,473 

12,517 
29,204 

12,460 

12,416 

12,443 

12, 516 

"Mfibraska _ __ 

28,564 

28,661 

28,782 

28,899 

29,024 

29,103 

29,299 

29,466 

29,613 

29, 723 

Nevada__ 

2,299 

2,301 

2,313 

6,862 

2,322 

2, 317 

2,311 

2,304 

2,290 

2,284 

2,282 

2,279 

New Hampshire_ 

6,673 

31,327 
4,889 
121,217 

6,740 

6,804 

6,913 

6,994 

7,023 

7,069 

7,098 

7,152 

7,183 

7,237 

New Jersey_ 

31,260 

31,199 

31,150 

31,188 

31,174 
4, 750 

31,099 

31,018 

30,960 

30,971 

30,940 

30,888 

New Mexico._ 

4,921 

4,944 

4,887 

4,816 

4,789 

4,796 

4,820 

4,876 
121,373 

4} 92u 

6,041 

New York _ 

121,463 

121,283 

121, 364 
37,206 

121,314 

121,496 
37, 549 

121,934 

121,842 

122,096 

121 ,687 
38,928 

121, 722 

North Carolina_ 

36; 988 
9,011 

36,918 

37,095 

37.441 

38,030 

38,270 

38,531 

38,727 

39,076 

North Dakota_ 

9,038 

9,069 

9,115 

9,145 

9,234 
137,943 

9,369 

9,406 

9,390 

9,434 

9,448 
139,058 
77,701 
21,814 
101,950 
7,358 

9,458 

Ohio _ 

134,597 
75,310 
19,759 

135,105 

135, 910 

136,624 

137,334 

138,438 

138,512 

138,692 

J.S8, 854 
77,577 
21,659 
102,347 
7,301 

Iby, i)«JO 

Oklahoma __ 

75,381 

76, 514 

75,701 

76,232 

76,469 

76,826 

77,065 

77j 3bi) 

77,831 

Oregon __ 

19,945 

20,180 

20,379 

20,626 

21,059 

21,248 
103,256 

21,416 

21,534 

21,857 
101,458 
7,400 

Pennsylvania_ 

100,302 

100,380 

101,097 

102, 557 

103,417 

103, 567 

103,109 

102 ,694 

Rhode Island_ 

6,974 

17,304 
14,926 
40,172 

6,932 

6,915 

6,930 

6,942 

6,976 

7,037 

7,110 

7,188 

South nerojinft 

17,163 

17,120 

17,166 

17,340 

17,683 

17,915 

18,115 

18,524 

18,878 
14,931 
39,566 
154,092 
14,626 
5,669 
20,280 
61,662 
21,212 
54,395 
3,631 

19,308 
14,922 
39,259 
157,155 
14, 706 
6,620 
20,243 
62,296 
21,739 
64,396 
3,657 

19,659 
14, 947 
38,755 
160, 513 
14, 736 
6,567 
20,254 
62,686 
22,121 
54, 522 
3,557 

South Dakoio 

14,913 
40,196 

14,915 

14,920 

14,979 

14,968 

14,967 
40,067 

14,946 

14}93^ 

Tennessee_ 

40,225 

40,167 

40,207 

40,164 

ay, ybu 

39 ,821 

150,260 
14, 567 
5,722 
20,237 
60,960 
20,625 
54,308 
3,529 

Texas ... 

120,863 

121, 739 

124,724 

128,113 

132, 762 

138,677 

143,buy 

147,815 

Utah .. 

13,692 

13, 768 

13,949 

14,105 

14,200 

14,284 

14, 368 

14, 503 

Vermont _ 

6,183 

5,830 

5,900 

6,863 

6,828 

5, 775 

b, 

5, 745 

Virginia_ 

19, 782 

19,841 

19,901 

19, 947 

19,993 

20,080 

20 ,183 

2u, 185 
60,050 
20,086 

Washington_ 

40,419 

40,676 

60,867 

64,251 

66,495 

67,964 

59,091 

Wpst. Virginia 

18,616 
63,486 

18, 663 

18, 548 

18,766 

19,059 

19,278 

19,483 
54,099 

Wiseon.sin . _- 

63,604 

53,676 

53,818 

63,926 

64,018 

54,202 
3,533 

Wyoming.... 

3,461 

3,469 

3, 500 

3, 518 

3, 618 

3, 523 

3, 518 


1 All 61 States have approved plans. ‘ Includes recipients 60 but under 65 years. 






































































6 


dictions—Alaska and Hawaii—eligible to partici¬ 
pate in programs under the Social Security Act. 
The program of old-age assistance expanded more 
rapidly than the other two programs. In De¬ 
cember 1941 there were 2,237,000 recipients of 
old-age assistance, an increase over December 1940 
of 8.1 percent (table 6). At the close of 1941 about 
944,000 children in 391,000 families were receiving 
aid to dependent children, increases over the previ¬ 
ous December of 5.4 and 5.2 percent, respectively 
(tables 7 and 8). Approximately 77,000 persons 


were receiving aid to the blind, representing an 
increase over December 1940 of 5.3 percent (table 
9). Factors which contributed to expansion of the 
programs are (1) the extension of Federal financial 
participation to successive new States, (2) liberal¬ 
ization of eligibility provisions in State laws, and 
(3) increase in Federal matching. Such changes 
have increased the funds available to State and 
local public assistance agencies and have enlarged 
the groups of persons eligible to benefit from the 
programs. 


Table 7.—Aid to dependent children: Families receiving aid, by State and month, 1941 * 


[Corrected to Feb. 15, 1942] 


State 

January 

February 

March 

April 

May 

June 

July 

August 

September 

October 

November 

December 

Total, 51 States. 

377, 577 

384,163 

388,614 

392, 628 

393, 849 

392,474 

389,077 

387, 344 

385, 011 

386,172 

386,141 

391,098 

Total, States 
with a p- 
proved plans 

364,427 

371,040 

375,608 

379, 650 

380, 831 

379,605 

376,148 

374,403 

372, 288 

380, 830 

381,163 

387,159 

Alabama... 

5, 881 

5,890 

6,924 

5,904 

5,834 

5,801 

5,832 

5,819 

5, 767 

5,791 

5,821 

5, 837 

Alaska > _ 

96 

96 

95 

96 

90 

90 

90 

90 

90 

90 

90 

90 

Arizona__ 

2, 502 

2,462 

2,444 

2,455 

2,459 

2,471 

2,459 

2,471 

2,455 

. 2,432 

2,443 

2,445 

Arkansas... 

6, 255 

6,296 

6, 332 

6,409 

6,483 

6,462 

6, 451 

6,423 

6,360 

6,339 

6,251 

6,216 

California_ 

15, 666 

15, 710 

15, 740 

15,801 

15, 840 

15,864 

15, 725 

15, 508 

15,386 

15, 083 

14,930 

14, 954 

Colorado_ 

6,331 

6,288 

6,384 

6,439 

6,413 

6, 362 

6, 276 

6,284 

6, 223 

6,137 

6, 111 

e; 142 

Connecticut_ 

1,356 

1,363 

1,343 

1,334 

1,397 

1,369 

1,365 

1,333 

1,308 

1,190 

1,168 

1 , no 

Delaware__ 

581 

595 

608 

615 

617 

624 

601 

596 

590 

581 

672 

569 

District of Columbia.. 

943 

939 

946 

961 

975 

982 

1,004 

1,019 

1, 007 

1,012 

1,015 

1,028 

Florida ‘_ 

4,334 

4,320 

4,344 

4,329 

4, 326 

4,235 

4,134 

4,302 

4,305 

4,682 

4,908 

6,481 

Georgia..... 

4,821 

4,938 

4,889 

4,849 

4,805 

4, 749 

4,696 

4,660 

4,612 

4, 559 

4,561 

4,583 

Hawaii _ 

1,238 

1,232 

2,987 

1,229 

1, 236 

1,236 

1,213 

1,195 

1,137 

1,115 

1,109 

1,095 

i;075 

Idaho___ 

2,969 

3, 015 

3, 029 

3,032 

3,048 

7,409 

3, 061 

3,090 

3,075 

3,044 

3, 027 

3,055 

Illinois_ 

7,m 

7,463 

7,486 

7,463 

7,461 

7,480 

7,693 

7,409 

* 10, 281 

* 11, 534 

* 15 ; 243 

Indiana.... 

17,331 

17,263 

17, 293 
3,606 

17,256 

17, 210 

17,032 
3,485 

16,190 

16, 041 

15,912 

15, 724 

15, 590 

15, 598 

Iowa_ 

3,681 

3,666 

3,496 

3,649 

3,495 

3,435 

3,413 

3,643 

3,313 

3,331 

Kansas. _ 

6,514 

6,532 

6,653 

6,608 

6,624 

6,6)0 

6, 533 

6,534 

6,545 

6,631 

6, 610 

6,654 

Kentucky *_ 

370 

370 

. 380 

410 

430 

430 

410 

410 

400 

400 

'400 

'400 

Louisiana__ 

14,958 

15, 269 

15, 582 

15, 800 

15,902 

15,812 

15,427 

15, 325 

15, 270 

15, 308 

15,352 

15,330 

Maine... 

1, 598 

1,589 

1, 574 

1, 560 

1,545 

1, 545 

1,601 

1,658 

1,691 

1,728 

1,738 

1,766 

Maryland.. ... 

7,046 

7,003 

7,000 
12, 804 

6,909 

6,676 

6,531 

6,341 

6,198 

6, 052 

5, 970 

6,932 

5,931 

Massachusetts_ 

12, 619 

12, 757 

12,825 

12, 795 

12, 695 

12, 586 

12, 441 

12, 471 

12, 355 

12, 313 

12 ’ 355 

Michigan_ 

20, 329 

20, 206 

20, 489 

21,045 

21,414 

21,459 

21, 448 

21, 362 

21,442 

21, 563 

21, 549 

21, 541 

Minnesota_ 

9, 260 

9,343 

9, 391 

9,449 

9,439 

9,398 

9,317 

9,287 

9,283 

9,216 

9,165 

9i, 190 

Mississippi. .. 

^104 

3104 

173 

174 

485 

999 

1,600 

1,911 

2,196 

2, 367 

2,464 

2, 531 

Missouri. 

13,179 

13, 230 

13,317 
2, 598 

13, 663 

13, 711 

13, 937 

14,058 

14, 206 

14, 278 

14, 299 

14, 424 

14 ; 372 

Montana___ 

2,522 

2,666 

2,619 

2, 660 

2,643 

2, 538 

2,625 

2,618 

2, 590 

2, 589 

2, 614 

Nebraska L... 

5,747 

6,773 

6,771 

5,808 

5,834 

114 

5,852 

5,800 

5,771 

5, 748 

5,736 

5! 756 

6,757 

Nevada_ 

103 

107 

107 

113 

no 

113 

116 

119 

119 

117 

118 

New Hampshire_ 

615 

605 

601 

697 

583 

678 

623 

654 

679 

708 

741 

741 

New Jersey_ 

11,268 

11,163 

11,141 

11,084 

10, 879 

10, 486 

10, 026 

9,839 

9,707 

9,528 

9, 440 

9, 398 

New Mexico.. 

2,074 

2,094 

2,096 

2,082 

2,047 

2,011 

2, 006 

2,023 

2,038 

2,094 

2,110 

2, 278 

New York.. 

34, 284 

34,127 

34,035 

33,823 

33, 698 

33, 203 

32, 650 

32, 317 

31, 709 

31, 210 

30’ 622 

30^ 257 

North Carolina.. 

9, 736 

9,752 

9,784 

9,831 

9,908 

9,858 

9,837 

9,832 

9,847 

9,834 

9i 832 

9 904 

North Dakota_ 

2,456 

2,455 

2, 477 

2,483 

2, 507 

2,502 

2,472 

2, 462 

2, 456 

2, 448 

2 478 

2, 486 

Ohio_ 

11,329 

11,457 

11,596 

11,698 

11, 772 

11,820 

11, 803 

11, 780 

11, 794 

11,813 

11,914 

11, 992 

Oklahoma... 

19, 287 

19, 256 

19, 363 

19, 377 

19, 518 

19, 562 

19, 732 

19,906 

19,982 

20;025 

19^ 962 

19,922 

Oregon. 

1,970 

2,000 

2,010 

2,025 

2,040 

2,067 

2,064 

2,074 

2,061 

2,052 

2, 072 

2089 
65, 663 

Pennsylvania.. 

S3, 596 

69, 323 

61, 827 

63, 982 

64,074 

63, 360 

61,989 

60, 506 

58, 984 

57, 464 

56, 239 

Ehode Island_ 

1,298 

1,285 

1,278 

1,291 

1,292 

1,305 

1,296 

1,288 

1,288 

i;310 

i;298 

1,280 

South Carolina . 

3,056 

3,110 

3, 315 

3,506 

3, 623 

3, 760 

3,808 

3,818 

3,879 

3,924 

3,923 

3,968 
1, 765 
14,091 
* 1,447 
4,047 
714 

South Dakota.. _ 

*992 

* 1,065 

* 1, 218 

< 1,339 

* 1,455 

* 1, 522 

* 1,600 

* 1,637 

* 1,677 

* 1,692 

* i, 734 

Tennessee_ 

14, 379 

14, 392 

14,403 

14, 379 

14,374 

14, 343 

14, 300 

14, 239 

14,175 

14,135 

U, 131 

Texas... 

88 

87 

90 

89 

87 

86 

86 

86 

84 

*351 

* ’ 751 

Utah. __ 

3,820 

3,869 

3,919 

3,961 

3,990 

4, 024 

4,031 

4,048 

4,040 

4,013 

4,035 

Vermont.. 

624 

621 

624 

618 

613 

613 

655 

674 

689 

696 

707 

Virginia... 

3,987 

4,078 

4,155 

4,247 

4,291 

4,342 

4, 505 

4, 564 

4, 636 

4,656 

4, 684 

4,788 
5,224 
11 , 073 
11 , 980 
775 

Washington_ 

4,993 

4,993 

5,025 

6,118 

5, 253 

5,309 

5,288 

5,281 

5, 305 

5,278 

5, 211 

West Virginia__ 

8,667 

8, 793 

8,872 

9,082 

9,235 

9, 360 

9,481 

9,783 

10, 031 

lOi 355 

10, 756 

Wisconsin__ 

12,646 

12, 680 

12, 727 

12, 732 

12, 694 

12,484 

12, 332 

12, 236 

12,142 

12,045 

12,002 

Wyoming_ 

726 

734 

742 

752 

770 

772 

777 

774 

768 

762 

771 


1 Figures in italics represent programs administered under State laws 
from State and/or local funds without Federal participation. 

* In January and February 43 States made payments under approved plans; 
Mississippi was added in March, Illinois and Texas in October, and Con¬ 
necticut in December. 

* Estimated. 


< Includes program administered under State law without Federal partic¬ 
ipation. 

«In addition, some families were aided from local funds without State or 
Federal participation under the State mothers’-pension law; some of these 
families also received aid under approved plan. 










































































7 


New Federal-State Programs 

During 1941, 4 State programs of aid to de¬ 
pendent children and 1 of aid to the blind came 
under the Social Security Act. At the close of 
the year the Federal Government participated in 
programs for old-age assistance in 51 States, for 
aid to dependent children in 47 States, and for aid 
to the blind in 44 States. Although the 5 new 
Federal-State assistance programs were in early 
stages of development, the results of Federal 


participation in 3 of these States are evident in 
the following comparison of case loads: 


Program and State 

State-local 
program 
December 1940 

Federal-State 
program 
December 1941 

Aid to dependent children: 

Connecticut .... 

1,369 

1,110 
«15,243 
2,531 
> 1,447 

1,815 

Illinois__ 

7,446 

104 

Mississippi____ 

Texas____ 

85 

Aid to the blind: 

Texas_ __ 




> Includes program administered under State law without Federal partici¬ 
pation. 


Table 8 .—Aid to dependent ehildren: Children receiving aid, by State and month, 1941 ^ 


[Corrected to Feb. 15, 1942] 


State 

January 

February 

March 

April 

May 

June 

July 

August 

September 

October 

November 

December 

Total, 51 States- 

912, 762 

928,298 

939, 393 

946, 244 

948,154 

945,973 

938,896 

935,034 

929,938 

931,698 

931,460 

944,186 

Total, States 
with approved 
plans 2_ 

882,897 

898,619 

909, 825 

916, 798 

918, 595 

916,789 

909, 567 

905, 543 

900,968 

919, 541 

919,892 

934,980 


Alabama__ 

17, 285 
S18 

17, 076 
218 

17,119 

17,005 

16,825 

16, 815 

16, 832 

16, 781 

16,676 

16,655 

16, 754 

16,835 
210 

Alaska*_ 

218 

218 

210 

210 

210 

210 

210 

210 

210 

Arizona_ 

7, 202 
15, 865 
37,666 
15, 469 
S,08i 
1,609 
2,825 
10, 822 

12,199 
4, 070 
7,425 
16,679 

6,492 

16,011 

6, 456 
16, 091 

6,475 

6,512 

6,563 

6, 492 

6,640 

6,646 

6,621 

6,705 

6,619 

Arkansas_ 

16,264 

16, 537 

16, 486 

16, 592 

16, 492 

16, 315 

16, 309 
35,960 

16,112 

16,038 

California_ 

37, 609 
15, 494 
S,09S 

37, 732 
15, 694 
3,066 

37,819 

37, 778 

37,815 

37, 591 

36, 998 

36,608 

35,476 

35,613 

Colorado_ 

15, 789 

15, 701 

15, 572 
2,908 

15,414 

15,438 

15, 286 

15,100 

15,083 

15,144 

Connecticut_ 

3,027 

2,970 

2,852 

2,793 

2,776 

2,728 

2,652 

2,977 

Delaware__ 

1,657 

1,689 

1,705 

1,723 

1,735 

1,691 

1,689 

1,671 

1,661 

1,646 

1,658 

District of Columbia.. 
Florida <__ 

2, 838 
10,839 

2, 869 
10, 835 

2,919 
10, 774 

2,963 
10, 767 

2,888 
10,974 

2,953 
10,373 

3,016 
10,752 

2,946 
10, 649 

2,963 
11, 367 

3,000 
11, 854 

3,001 
13,128 

Georgia . __ 

12,421 

12,229 

12,114 

11,971 

11, 788 

11, 622 

11, 497 

11,343 

11,174 

11,163 

11, 229 

Hawaii_ 

4,017., 

3,997 

4,033 

4,001 

3,909 

3,850 

3,646 

3, 574 

3, 532 

3,484 

3,418 

Idaho. _ 

7,481 

7,561 

7, 589 

7,599 

7,666 

7, 743 

7,802 

7,780 

7,739 

7,708 

7,783 

Illinois__ 

16,492 

16,613 

16,637 

16,609 

16,626 

16,681 

17,067 

16,676 

* 23,320 

* 25,663 

‘34,489 

Indiana_ 

35, 594 

35, 397 

35, 443 

35,404 

35, 373 

35,108 
7,751 

33, 527 

33, 248 

33,082 

32,678 

32,436 

32,422 

Iowa.._ 

8 , 184 
15, 301 
i,m 
40, 954 

8,069 
15, 346 

7,996 

7,884 

7,963 

7,813 

7,665 

7,660 

7,642 

7,131 

7,422 

Kansas _ 

15, 395 

15, 590 

15, 653 

15,634 

15, 451 

15, 538 

15,605 

15, 596 

15,833 
1,300 

15,988 

1,300 

Kentucky *_ 

1,210 

1,235 

1,330 

1,350 

1,360 

1,330 

1,320 

1,300 

1,300 

TiOnisianft 

40,655 
4,012 

41,665 

39, 748 

39, 628 

39,658 

39, 475 

38,917 

38,813 

39,006 

38,998 

38,940 

Maine _ 

4, 036 

18, 971 
31, 276 
48, 773 

3,980 

3, 936 

3,887 

3,864 

4,118 

4,334 

4,446 

4,682 

4,730 

4, 801 

Maryland_ 

18, 758 

18, 762 

18, 514 

17, 922 

17, 744 

17, 307 

16, 980 

16, 595 

16,411 

16,331 

16,328 

Massachusetts_ 

31,568 

31,650 

31,659 

31, 591 

31, 273 

30,925 

30, 584 

30,632 

30,332 

30, 279 

30, 317 

Michigan_ 

48,345 

48,860 

49, 949 
22, 390 

.50,625 

50, 768 

50,693 

50,462 

50, 524 

50, 586 

50,440 

50, 393 

Minnesota_ 

21, 991 
* 16£ 

22,149 

22,263 

22, 408 

22, 284 

22,136 

22, 014 

22,071 

21,869 

21, 730 

21,823 

Mississippi _ 

^162 

492 

491 

1,343 

2,713 

4, 276 

5, 022 

5,760 

6,183 

6,408 

6,561 

Missouri_ 

30, 944 

30,945 

31,029 

31, 486 

31, 787 

32, 297 

32, 485 

32,830 

32, 942 

32,969 

33, 232 

33,078 

Montana_ 

6,149 

6,272 

6,339 

6,377 

6,461 

6,411 

6, 226 

6,454 

6,416 

6,353 

6,351 

6,411 

N^phra-^ka 5 

12, 767 

m 

12,880 

12,923 

12, 978 

13,024 

13,077 

12, 990 

12,935 

12,867 

12, 796 

12,861 

12,849 

Nevada _ 

254 

256 

267 

278 

262 

268 

275 

280 

277 

276 

274 

New Hampshire_ 

1,525 

1,503 

1,485 

1,467 

1,430 

1,407 

1,534 

1,628 

1,691 

1,767 

1,853 

1,855 

New Jersey. _ 

25, 466 

25, 230 

25,174 

25,107 
5,929 

24, 686 

23,833 

22, 690 

22,332 

22,122 

21, 749 

21,539 

21,465 

TMpw TVfpxino . 

5,927 
67, 382 

5, 960 

5, 969 

5,828 

5,710 

5,703 

5, 723 

5,785 

5,974 

6,083 

6,603 

New Y ork _ 

67,069 

66, 896 

66, 519 

66,082 

65,242 

63,899 

63, 425 

62,481 

61, 535 

60,425 

59,796 

North Carolina_ 

23,716 

23,586 

23, 627 

23,672 

23, 742 

23,585 

23, 440 

23,416 

23, 397 

23, 296 

23,313 

23,409 

North Pf^knta 

6,794 

6, 798 

6, 838 

6,862 

6,901 

6,946 

6,884 

6,819 

6,773 

6, 766 

6,830 

6,915 

Ohio__ 

30,773 

31,077 

31,286 

31,542 

31,644 

31,734 

31,643 

31,565 

31,491 

31,246 
45,960 

31,265 
45,827 
4,873 
140,660 
3,664 

31,488 
45, 758 
4,908 
139, 392 
3, 597 

Oklahoma 

44,084 

43, 995 

44,247 

44,329 

44, 701 

44,879 

45, 274 

45, 728 

45,889 

Oregon_ 

4, 625 

4,690 

4, 736 

4, 777 

4,814 

4,887 

4,872 

4, 877 

4,850 

4,814 
143,883 

Ppnnsylvania 

132, 645 

148,496 

154,904 

160, 244 

160,054 

158, 348 

154,977 

151,34y 

147,811 

Rhode Island_ 

3,703 

3, 661 

3,658 

3,710 

3, 685 

3, 730 

3,667 

3,660 

3,645 

3, 708 

Rrrnt.h Carolina. _ 

9,069 
< 2, 221 
36, 232 
182 

9, 213 

9, 677 

10, 286 

10, 692 
‘ 3,408 

10,992 

11,183 

11,195 

11,331 

11,351 
*3, 954 
35, 251 
<721 
10, 514 
1,857 
13,640 
12,678 
27, 493 
27,553 
1,969 

11,476 

< 4,064 
35,268 

< 1,561 
10, 573 

1,887 
13, 716 
12,584 
28,641 
27, 507 
2, 006 

11,635 
4,137 
35,035 
* 3,034 
10,616 
1,911 
13,978 
12,628 
29,497 
27,453 
2,027 

Snnt.h Dakota .. _ 

‘ 2, 567 

< 2,950 

< 3,179 

* 3, 548 

* 3, 747 

* 3,813 

* 6, 895 


36, 271 
181 

36,231 

36,097 

36,034 

35,921 

35, 797 

35, 55/ 

35 ,414 
169 
10, 581 
1,850 
13,630 
12,744 
26,665 
27, 701 
1,975 

Tpras .. __ 

184 

183 

179 

177 

175 

171 

Utah .. 

9, 899 

10,037 

10,186 
1, 719 

10, 274 

10, 389 

10, 483 

10, 519 

lU, 583 

Vprmont 

1,740 

1, 721 

1, 702 

1,690 

1,693 

1,792 

1, 84^5 

Virginia .. _ 

11,963 

12,230 

12,414 

12,643 

12, 746 

12,813 

13, 254 

13, 

12, 622 


11,851 

11,825 

11, 913 

12,136 

12, 477 

12,653 

12, 614 

WpRt Virg’inia. _ 

23, 519 

23, 777 

24,003 

24, 398 

24, 706 

24, 992 

25, 247 

26,022 
27,909 
2.001 

Wi^ponsin . _ 

28, 742 

28, 825 

28,999 

29, 023 

28, 851 

28, 383 

28,089 

Wyoming_ 

1.828 

1,826 

1,840 

1,894 

1,956 

1,968 

1, 980 


< Figures in italics represent programs administered under State laws from 

State and/or local funds without Federal participation. 

1 In January and February 43 States made payments under approved 
plans; Mississippi was added in March, Illinois and Texas m October, and 
Connecticut in December. 

* Estimated. 


< Includes program administered under State law without Federal partici¬ 
pation. 

»In addition, some children were aided from local funds without State or 
Federal participation under the State mothers’-pension law; some of these 
children also received aid under approved plan. 


4654 . 39“—42 - 2 


























































































8 


Liberalization in Eligibility Provisions 

Durmg 1941 several State legislatures liberalized 
conditions of eligibility for assistance and stand¬ 
ards for determining payments. Such liberaliza¬ 
tions were reflected in increases in coverage in 
these States. In Indiana, for example, repeal of a 
provision for liens on property was followed by 
marked increase in applications for old-age assist¬ 
ance and by some increase in the number of re¬ 
cipients. The old-age assistance load in Washing¬ 
ton increased nearly 56 percent over the previous 
year, largely because the method for determining 
the amount of the payment was changed from one 


providing a maximum of $30 to payments of a flat 
amount of $40 minus income. In Georgia, where 
the State legislature determined that all persons 
eligible for old-age assistance should receive an 
award, the number of recipients of old-age assist¬ 
ance rose 48 percent during the year. 

Increase in Federal Matching 

No changes occurred during 1941 in the provi¬ 
sions of the Social Security Act for Federal partici¬ 
pation in individual payments. In 1940, however, 
a number of changes became operative: The max¬ 
imum age for aid to dependent children was raised 


Table 9 .—Aid to the blind: Recipients, by State and month, 1941 * 


[Corrected to Feb. 15,1942] 


State 

January 

February 

March 

April 

May 

June 

July 

August 

September 

October 

November 

December 

Total, 48 States A 

73, 406 

73,543 

73, 492 

73,884 

73. 995 

74,107 

74,089 

74, 441 

74, 963 

76,173 

76, 728 

77, 293 

Total, States with 













approved 













plans*_ 

49, 111 

49,248 

49,370 

49,649 

49,700 

49,817 

49,878 

60,208 

60,412 

61,791 

52,187 

62,616 

Alabama__ 

613 

613 

618 

621 

618 

615 

620 

623 

625 

636 

636 

637 

Arizona_ 

381 

384 

388 

397 

400 

404 

401 

404 

404 

404 

397 

400 

Arkansas__ 

1,106 

1,112 

1,112 

1.132 

1,139 

1,142 

1,152 

1,159 

1,149 

1,158 

1,150 

1,154 

California_ 

7,286 

7,286 

7,291 

7,295 

7,292 

7,290 

* 7,268 

* 7, 281 

* 7, 309 

* 7, 306 

* 7, 279 

‘ 7, 287 

Colorado__ 

599 

606 

605 

604 

601 

607 

607 

608 

614 

618 

626 

630 

Connecticut *_ 

213 

216 

221 

223 

216 

233 

208 

230 

213 

214 

217 

211 

District of Columbia— 

222 

223 

224 

230 

231 

234 

232 

237 

234 

246 

247 

255 

Florida .. 

2,474 

2,467 

2,483 

2, 499 

2,651 

2,536 

2, 571 

2,594 

2, 620 

2,631 

2,651 

2,678 

Georgia_ 

1,359 

1,391 

1, 447 

1, 496 

1, 553 

1, 576 

1,600 

1,621 

1,662 

1,663 

1, 723 

1,783 

Hawaii..__ 

68 

69 

71 

72 

69 

68 

73 

75 

78 

81 

82 

77 

Idaho_ 

277 

279 

283 

279 

278 

278 

283 

282 

284 

280 

282 

280 

Illinois_ 

7,659 

7,688 

7,m 

7,606 

7,474 

7,410 

7,354 

7,977 

7,541 

7,339 

7,517 

7,654 

Indiana.... 

2,405 

•2,403 

2,401 

2, 391 

2,372 

2,369 

2,358 

2,350 

2,352 

2,359 

2,358 

2,353 

Iowa_ 

1,608 

1,517 

1.523 

1,519 

1, 618 

1,527 

1, 537 

1,639 

1,547 

1, 555 

1, 550 

1,544 

Kansas_ 

1,384 

1.394 

1,404 

1,413 

1,411 

1, 402 

1, 382 

1, 394 

1,373 

1,369 

1, 364 

1, 355 

Louisiana_ 

1,173 

1,185 

1,204 

1,226 

1,232 

1,260 

1,248 

1, 246 

1,248 

1, 252 

1,269 

1,284 

Maine_ 

1,126 

1,104 

1,094 

1,082 

1,070 

1,071 

1,074 

1,083 

1,085 

1,094 

1,093 

1,097 

Maryland_ 

682 

679 

674 

677 

678 

671 

662 

657 

652 

653 

649 

646 

Massachusetts_ 

1.169 

1,167 

1,167 

1,176 

1,176 

1,175 

1,175 

1,187 

1,190 

1,181 

1,169 

1,161 

Michigan_ 

1,123 

1,160 

1,181 

1,206 

1,221 

1, 244 

1, 251 

1,289 

1, 308 

1,332 

1,340 

1,347 

Minnesota_ 

961 

969 

970 

970 

980 

975 

986 

984 

999 

997 

1,001 

1,005 

Mississippi. _ 

963 

984 

999 

1,014 

1,030 

1,071 

1,083 

1,120 

1,159 

1, 203 

1,221 

1,234 

Missouri *. __ 

S,184 

s,m 

S,165 

S,S0i 

s,m 

s.m 

s,m 

s,m 

s,m 

S,108 

S,046 

S,04S 

Montana. _ 

220 

228 

239 

245 

250 

260 

275 

281 

285 

286 

295 

291 

Nebraska <_ 

707 

708 

706 

706 

715 

718 

724 

732 

743 

756 

758 

756 

Nevada... 

IS 

15 

17 

18 

18 

17 

as 

2S 

96 

95 

9S 

96 

New Hampshire_ 

316 

321 

321 

322 

328 

330 

329 

329 

333 

332 

334 

332 

New Jersey.. 

744 

760 

753 

757 

751 

739 

738 

742 

744 

741 

739 

733 

New Mexico. 

222 

225 

222 

220 

218 

218 

219 

218 

231 

233 

236 

235 

New York_ 

2,874 

2, 869 

2,848 

2,849 

2,852 

2,845 

2,840 

2,867 

2,879 

2,855 

2,830 

2,809 

North Carolina... 

1,894 

1, 893 

1,894 

1,896 

1,901 

1,911 

1,994 

2,049 

2,065 

2,084 

2,115 

2,163 

North Dakota_ 

230 

229 

230 

230 

230 

219 

136 

136 

134 

136 

' 136 

140 

Ohio_ 

4,027 

4,047 

4, 022 

4,035 

4,023 

3,998 

3, 986 

3,985 

3,980 

3,982 

3,993 

3,995 

Oklahoma__ 

2,184 

2,171 

2,168 

2,160 

2,151 

2,153 

2,157 

2,167 

2,185 

2,181 

2,186 

2,184 

Oregon ___ 

456 

467 

455 

452 

459 

465 

466 

475 

474 

478 

481 

475 

Pennsylvania_ 

13,4S9 

IS, S89 

IS, US 

IS, 507 

IS, 58t 

IS, 656 

IS, 715 

IS, 81S 

IS, 864 

IS, 910 

IS, 955 

IS, 954 

Rhode Island_ 

70 

74 

79 

82 

81 

84 

83 

85 

93 

98 

99 

104 

South Carolina _ 

761 

758 

754 

766 

784 

801 

803 

801 

804 

796 

797 

806 

South Dakota _ 

259 

265 

268 

273 

279 

281 

282 

264 

266 

252 

251 

253 

Tennessee_ 

1,649 

1,650 

1, 646 

1,640 

1,638 

1,645 

1,641 

1,638 

1,629 

1,621 

1,619 

1,616 

Texas___ 










1 , 

1 ^^9. 


Utah _ 

190 

187 

187 

182 

182 

183 

180 

180 

179 

174 

’l76 

’l77 

Vermont___ 

147 

145 

145 

150 

158 

158 

158 

161 

161 

161 

164 

163 

Virginia.. 

1,028 

1,036 

1,038 

1,035 

1,034 

1,025 

1,045 

1, 057 

1,066 

1,057 

1,060 

1,064 

Washington. _ 

1,045 

1,048 

1, 044 

1,044 

1,043 

1,041 

1,057 

1,061 

1,052 

1,042 

1,039 

1,036 

West Virginia_ 

837 

841 

846 

849 

850 

862 

873 

897 

915 

933 

948 

960 

Wisconsin _ 

2,017 

2,014 

2.000 

1,987 

1,987 

1,983 

1,978 

1,977 

1,979 

1,970 

1,956 

1,955 

Wyoming__ 

143 

144 

145 

147 

150 

150 

144 

143 

141 

140 

139 

' 136 


■ Figures in italics represent programs administered under State laws from 
State and/or local funds without Federal participation. 

* Delaware and Alaska do not have programs; information on status of pro¬ 
gram in Kentucky not available. 


* For January-September, 43 States made payments under approved plans; 
Texas was added in October. 

‘ Includes program administered under State law without Federal partici¬ 
pation. 

• Estimated. 























































































9 


from 15 to 17 for children attending school; the 
maximum payment for old-age assistance and aid 
to the blind, from $30 to $40; and the Federal 
matching ratio for aid to dependent children, from 
one-third to one-half. A number of States first 
took advantage of these liberalizations in 1941 
after amendment of State legislation; in other 
States the effects of liberalizations made in 1940 
continued into 1941. 

Increase in State and Local Funds 

An added factor in expansion of the programs of 
old-age assistance, aid to dependent children, and 
aid to the blind in 1941 was the increase in State 
and local funds and consequently in the amount of 
Federal matching funds. The assistance programs 
first came under the Social Security Act in 1936 
during the economic depression. State and local 
funds available for the special types of public 
assistance in 1941 showed the first marked effect of 
improved economic conditions. With the upswing 
in business there were increases both in appropria¬ 
tions and in revenues earmarked for public assist¬ 
ance. Increased funds enabled many States to 
accept substantial numbers of persons whose ap¬ 
plications had been pending for some time. In 
States administering programs throughout 1940 
and 1941 under plans approved by the Social 
Security Board, the number of applications pend¬ 
ing was reduced by 50,000 for old-age assistance, 
by about 7,000 for aid to dependent children, and 
by about 800 for aid to the blind. 

State Variations 

The rise from December 1940 to December 1941 
in the coverage of the programs of old-age assist¬ 
ance, aid to dependent children, and aid to the 
blind for the Nation as a whole obscured the 
varied trends in the State programs. The differ¬ 
ences in the amount and direction of change in the 
coverage of each program are summarized in table 10. 

Old-age assistance .—Expansion in coverage of 
the old-age assistance programs occurred in all but 
five States (table 6). Among the reasons for such 
general expansion are the progressive increase in 
the number of aged persons in the general popula¬ 
tion and the popular interest in their security. 
Increased employment opportunities did not 
result in any substantial reduction in the number 
of recipients of old-age assistance, even in centers 


Table 10.—Special types of assistance: Number of 
States with specified percentage changes in number 
of recipients from December 1940 to December 1941, 
by program 


Number of States 


Percentage change 

Old-age 

assistance 

Aid to de¬ 
pendent chil¬ 
dren (family) 

Aid to 
the blind 

Total_ 

51 

1 47 

1 43 

Increase: 

Under 5.0.. 

24 

11 

6 

5.0-9.9__ 

12 

9 

8 

5 

10.0-19.9__ 

7 

7 

20.0 and over ... 

3 

5 

4 

Decrease: 

Under 5.0__ 

5 

8 

17 

2 

5.0-9.9_____ 


1 

10.0-19.9___ 


6 


20.0 and over.... 



1 





> Excludes States which had no State-wide programs in December 1940, 
States for which data are estimated, and States with less than 100 recipients 
in December 1940. 


of armament production.^ The majority of the 
recipients of old-age assistance are aged 70 or over 
and hence are comparatively unemployable. In 
Delaware, Maryland, Nevada, New Jersey, and 
Tennessee, as contrasted with the other States, 
the number of persons receiving old-age assistance 
in December 1941 was lower than in the previous 
December. The declines in Maryland and New 
Jersey were fairly continuous throughout the year. 

Aid to dependent children .—From January 
through May 1941 the number of families receiving 
aid to dependent children in the United States 
continued an upward trend, partly reflecting 
liberalizations in the matching provisions which 
became effective in January 1940 (tables 7 and 8). 
In June 1941 the case load began a decline which 
continued until October, when the effect of the 
new Federal-State programs became apparent. 
From December 1940 to December 1941 the num¬ 
ber of families receiving aid to dependent children 
declined in 15 States.^ In 5 of these States— 
Connecticut, Indiana, Maryland, New Jersey, and 
New York—the downward trend began in 1940 
and by December 1941 resulted in reductions of 
11-23 percent in the number of families aided. 

These declines may be explained by several 
factors, including the employment of parents or 
other adults caring for dependent children, the 
employment of older children, and the movement 
of families to WPA rolls. Data on reasons for 

1 Perkins, Walter M., “Measuring the Effect of Defense Employment on 
Relief Loads,” Social Security BuUelin, Vol. 5, No. 2 (February 1942), pp. 5-9. 

1 Alabama, Arizona, California. Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, 
Indiana, Iowa, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Ten¬ 
nessee, and Wisconsin. 























10 


closing cases suggest that, among other factors, 
the failure of aid to dependent children payments 
in most States to keep pace with the rising cost of 
living may have encouraged some mothers needed 
in the home for the care of young children to go to 
work and some older children to leave school for 
jobs. In times of economic depression the relief 
rolls are heavily weighted with workers with little 
formal education. Some of the children who are 
now leaving the aid to dependent children rolls to 
go to work may find it difficult to compete with 
better educated workers in periods of unemploy¬ 
ment and may again need public aid with the 
downswing of the business cycle. 

Aid to the blind .—During 1941 the number of 
recipients of aid to the blind increased in the 
country as a whole, but declined in almost half the 
States providing such assistance (table 9). In 
most of these States, however, the declines were 
small. Increased support from relatives, the 
restoration or improvement of vision of blind per¬ 
sons, and employment of blind persons contrib¬ 
uted to the decrease in the number aided. During 
the year, 54 workshops for the blind in 27 States 
were engaged in filling Government orders for a 
variety of products for which the war has increased 
the demand.^ In North Dakota a decline of more 
than 38 percent from December 1940 to Decem¬ 
ber 1941 resulted from the transfer of aged blind 
persons to old-age assistance, for which funds are 
more nearly adequate. Similar shifts may have 
occurred in some other States. 

Applications and Case Closings 

The change to a defense economy was reflected 
in declines in applications received and increases 
in cases closed under all thi-ee programs. The 
changes from 1940 to 1941 in applications and 
closings in States in which Federal-State programs 
operated throughout both years is given in table 
11. The rate of decline in applications was sim¬ 
ilar for the different programs. There were, 
however, very sharp differences among the pro¬ 
grams in the rate of increase in case closings. 
There was only a veiy slight increase in the number 
of aged persons dropped from the roUs, but the 
number of families for whom aid to dependent 
children was discontinued increased by one-half. 


5 “About the Blind,” Surety Midmonthly, Vol. 78, No. 1 (January 1942), 
p. 23. 


Table 11 .—Special types of assistance: Applications 
received and cases closed in States with approved 
plans, by program, 1941 * 


/ Program 

Applica¬ 

tions 

received 

Cases 

closed 

Percentage change 
from 1940 

Applica¬ 

tions 

received 

Cases 

closed 

Old-age assistance_ 

626, 237 

289, 412 

-6.4 

+ 2.3 

Aid to dependent children_ 

191, 691 

120, 644 

-6.1 

+51.4 

Aid to the blind_ 

15, 732 

7, 852 

-7.6 

+14.3 


* Excludes States which did not have approved plans for all months of 1940 
and 1941. 


Changes in Coverage of General Relief 

The general relief program is primarily a residual 
program, the size of which is influenced by trends 
in other programs as well as by changes in eco¬ 
nomic conditions (table 12). The sharp rise in 
employment radically reduced general relief loads 
in 1941*. In December 1941, 798,000 cases were on 
the relief rolls, a drop of 441,000 cases or nearly 36 
percent from December 1940. The decline in the 
number of persons aided is estimated to be more 
than 40 percent. 

The major part of the reduction in general relief 
loads is attributable to expanding employment 
opportunities in war industries. Relatively few 
workers formerly on relief, however, went directly 
into jobs in war industries, since these industries 
drew primarily from civilian industries and drew 
only the best qualified workers from Federal work 
programs and general relief rolls. Many vacancies 
thus created in industries producing for civilian 
use were filled by workers from the Federal work 
programs and the general relief rolls. The shift to 
industry of workers on Federal work programs 
more than offset the reduction in employment 
quotas resulting from cuts in appropriations, and 
many relief recipients were able to obtain employ¬ 
ment on projects with earnings higher than their 
relief payments. 

The prevalence of job opportunities has induced 
many general relief agencies to adopt policies under 
wliich relief is given only to families in which no 
member is presumed to be employable. Conse¬ 
quently, most of the people remaining on relief are 
in families without “employables.” Since families 
with employable members tend to be larger than 
other families, the cases remaining on the rolls are 















11 


the smaller families, including a large number of 
one-person cases. The average number of persons 
per case was estimated to be 2.9 in December 
1940, and 2.6 in December 1941. 

Of continuing but secondary significance in the 
decline in general relief loads during 1941 is the 
growth in the programs of old-age assistance and 
aid to dependent children. 

State Trends 

Although in 1941 the trend in general relief was 
downward in almost all States, the rates of decline 
and the seasonal changes in the case loads of 


individual States varied widely from the trend for 
the Nation as a whole (chart 1). Armament 
production infiuenced case loads significantly in 
some States and had relatively slight influence in 
others. In regions where general relief programs 
have made little or no provision for families in need 
because of unemployment or under-employment, 
the possibilities of reduction in relief loads were 
negligible. 

In the southern States, which are not primarily 
industrial and in which general relief is meager, 
case loads were relatively stable; the number of 
relief cases even increased from December 1940 to 


Table 12.—General relief in the continental United States: Cases receiving assistance, by State and month, 1941 

[Corrected to Feb. 15, 1942] 


State 

January 

February 

March 

April 

May 

June 

July 

August 

September 

October 

November 

Deeember 

Total. 

1, 257, 000 

1, 230,000 

1, 210,000 

1,153,000 

1,038,000 

934,000 

876,000 

859,000 

817,000 

796,000 

782,000 

798,000 

Alabama_ 

2,316 

2,356 

2,364 

2,382 

2,429 

2,387 

2,390 

2,352 

2,337 

2,320 

2,321 

2,286 

Arizona..__ 

3,169 

3,079 

3,184 

3,106 

3,075 

2,799 

2,845 

2,854 

2,687 

2,671 

2,733 

2,821 

Arkansas_ 

4, 406 

4, 392 

4,393 

4,393 

4,318 

3,463 

3, 363 

3,267 

3,228 

3,183 

3,606 

3,848 

California ’_ 

89,093 

84,026 

82,178 

78,057 

71,870 

62,140 

2 45, 393 

42,181 

35,375 

32,502 

30, 782 

31,564 

Colorado *_ 

15, 701 

15,181 

14,440 

14, 419 

12, 534 

10,013 

8,561 

8,541 

8,861 

8,310 

8,904 

10, 272 

Connecticut-.- _ 

13, 405 

12,916 

12, 484 

11,281 

9,681 

8,571 

8,046 

7,765 

7,514 

7,240 

7,020 

7,110 

Delaware_ 

1,124 

1,087 

1,184 

1,179 

1,073 

951 

816 

808 

807 

747 

760 

746 

District of Columbia. 

2,069 

2,157 

2,207 

2,240 

2,148 

2,075 

2,075 

2,223 

2,265 

2,208 

2,165 

2,059 

Florida.... 

9,003 

7,975 

8, 257 

8, 409 

8, 434 

8, 343 

8,528 

8,467 

8, 274 

8,193 

7,983 

8,204 

Georgia_ 

6,873 

6,473 

6,298 

5,979 

5,962 

5,880 

5,957 

5,841 

6,850 

6,017 

5, 874 

6,025 

Idaho ‘_ _ 

2,376 

2, 335 

2,346 

2,208 

1,456 

1,410 

1,370 

1,411 

1,361 

1,324 

1,282 

1,225 

Illinois_ _ 

150, 756 

147,193 

144, 798 

139, 339 

126, 533 

113,900 

108,872 

111, 195 

108,606 

105, 907 

102, 537 

99,502 

Indiana». .. 

44, 496 

43,227 

40,560 

34, 578 

27,815 

23, 484 

23, 282 

23,766 

24,172 

23,199 

23, 636 

24,698 

Iowa_ 

27, 339 

27,048 

26,698 

24,679 

20,875 

18, 759 

18,102 

17,711 

16, 510 

15,950 

15,848 

16,828 

Kansas__ 

15,990 

16, 290 

15, 265 

14,052 

13,264 

12,186 

11,222 

11,723 

11, 797 

11,699 

11,848 

11,628 

Kentucky *_ 

Louisiana__ 

5,700 

6,100 

6,000 

5,300 

4,700 

5,000 

5,200 

4,700 

4,700 

4,400 

4,700 

4,500 

11,496 

11,901 

12, 404 

12,455 

12, 569 

12,677 

12, 262 

12,100 

11, 944 

11,885 

11,902 

11,887 

Maine_ 

IQ, 086 

9,568 

9,207 

8,842 

7,791 

6,774 

6,247 

5,886 

5,700 

5,639 

5,595 

5,882 

Maryland_ 

8, 676 

8,665 

8, 752 

8, 374 

7,683 

7,241 

7,099 

7,079 

7,139 

6,995 

6,988 

7,098 

Massachusetts_ 

52, 753 

49,858 

48,228 

45,135 

40,921 

36, 732 

37,266 

36,820 

35,505 

35,127 

34,245 

35, 352 

Michigan__ 

Minnesota_ 

51,417 

50,329 

49, 519 

46, 685 

40,397 

32,829 

30, 227 

30, 886 

30, 542 

31, 335 

31,483 

33, 717 

34,825 

33, 705 

33, 273 

31,805 

26,976 

23,303 

21,465 

21, 441 

20, 341 

20,236 

21,278 

22,651 

Mississippi_ 

Missouri--.. 

903 

916 

905 

897 

918 

745 

737 

700 

701 

693 

638 

682 

25,011 

24,669 

24,128 

23,029 

21, 398 

19,879 

18,159 

16, 233 

14,930 

14,978 

15,152 

15, 757 

Montana__ 

4,633 

4,137 

4,187 

3,899 

3, 313 

3,004 

2,895 

2,630 

2,595 

2,592 

2, 729 

3,105 

Nebraska_ 

9,860 

10,050 

9,783 

8,030 

6,773 

5,763 

5,233 

5,482 

5, 285 

6,137 

6,087 

5,626 

Nevada_ 

552 

502 

519 

520 

477 

426 

427 

474 

508 

461 

563 

517 

New Hampshire_ 

6,956 

6,501 

6, 498 

5,992 

5,287 

4, 543 

4,156 

4,001 

3,781 

3,594 

3,548 

3,692 

New Jersey *_ 

New Mexico *_ 

38,154 

37,294 

35, 744 

35, 737 

31, 589 

26,539 

25, 264 

24,893 

23,867 

23,268 

23,004 

23, 475 

1,754 

1,837 

1,906 

1, 774 

1,795 

1,759 

1,733 

1,609 

1,409 

945 

1,165 

1,164 

New York ?_ 

237,375 

236, 482 

238, 445 

229,603 

212, 594 

199,949 

195, 256 

192, 550 

183, 950 

179, 685 

173, 762 

174, 557 

North Carolina_ 

5,669 

5, 644 

5, 274 

4, 754 

4,601 

4, 435 

4,180 

4,135 

4,018 

3,920 

4,174 

4, 536 

North Dakota_ 

4,102 

3, 736 

3,889 

3,653 

2,862 

2, 556 

2,199 

1,898 

1,954 

1,968 

2, 203 

2, 854 

Ohio _ 

76, 775 

76,151 

73, 995 

65, 564 

55, 545 

47,980 

44, 514 

45, 353 

43, 373 

42,188 

42,071 

43, 351 

Oklahoma *_ 

12,164 

12,056 

11,267 

9,963 

10,618 

11,129 

5,987 

9, 777 

10,436 

10,079 

9, 490 

10,108 

Oregon . __ 

9,744 

8,887 

8,313 

7,895 

7,222 

6,581 

6,055 

5, 756 

5,468 

5, 388 

5, 549 

6, 916 

Pennsylvania_ 

155,893 

152,455 

151,455 

146, 726 

134, 730 

123,071 

115,140 

106, 227 

93,700 

87, 261 

81, 560 

80,771 

Rhode Island *_ 

3 6, 254 

3 4,962 

3 4, 697 

« 4,480 

3 3,885 

3 3, 220 

3 3, 292 

33,117 

2, 972 

3,090 

3f 113 

3, 293 

South Carolina.- _ 

2,148 

2,143 

2,183 

2,186 

2,184 

2,272 

2,311 

2,371 

2,361 

2, 413 

2 ,428 

2, 432 

South Dakota_ 

4,994 

5,128 

4, 937 

4,738 

4,010 

3,126 

2,902 

2,693 

2,365 

2, 574 

2,687 

2,929 

Tftnne.s.sftfi ^ . . 

3, 300 

3,400 

3,400 

2,900 

2,700 

2,600 

2,700 

2,700 

2, 600 

2,700 

2,600 

2,600 

TpYas 

11,160 

11, 223 

10, 725 

10,290 

10, 351 

9, 550 

9,128 

8,948 

9,048 

by 852 

8, 790 

9, 460 

Utah 

5, 486 

5 ; 283 

5, 344 

5, 438 

5,269 

4,855 

4,808 

4,804 

4,075 

4,141 

3) 881 

4,158 

Vprmnnt .... 

2, 530 

2, 367 

2,349 

2,086 

1,828 

1,599 

1,437 

1,395 

1,349 

1,383 

1,408 

1,641 

Virginia__ 

Washington.. 

West Virginia_ 

Wisconsin.. - 

Wyoming__ 

5, 850 

6,074 

6,075 

5,946 

5,648 

5, 352 

5,217 

5,139 

6, U36 

4,981 

4 ,930 

3y OIU 

17,382 
11, 854 

15,965 
12,131 

14,572 
12,183 

12,682 
17, 674 

10, 390 
15,034 

9,605 
12, 572 

8,580 

11,815 

7,879 
11,852 

7 ,461 

12, 496 

7,321 
12,901 

7,719 
13, 395 

8,844 
14,132 

38,177 
1,445 

37 ; 516 
1,501 

37, 316 
1,527 

34,846 
1,491 

28,461 

1,103 

24,116 
870 

21, 836 
798 

21,109 
799 

20,064 
769 

20,180 
778 

20, 791 
829 

21 ,639 
941 


> Partly estimated; does not represent sum of State figures, because in 4 
States an estimated number of cases receiving medical care, hospitalization, 
and/or burial only have been excluded, an estimated number of cases aided 
by local officials in Rhode Island have been included, and data on cases aided 
in Oklahoma have been estimated to exclude duplication. 

’ State relief administration discontinued operations June 30,1941; data for 

subsequent months represent county indigent aid only. . . . 

^ Includes unknown number of cases receiving medical care, hospitalization, 
and/or burial only. 


1 Excludes cases receiving assistance in kind only and, for a few counties, 
cash payments. 

e Estimated. , . . .. , , ~ , 

« State program only; excludes program administered by local officials. 

? Includes cases receiving medical care only; number believed by State 
agency to be insignificant. .t..:., 

* Represents cases aided under program administered by State Board of 
Public Welfare and under program administered by county commissioners; 
duplication believed to be large. 











































































12 


Chart 1.—Index of cases receiving general relief in the 
continental United States and in selected States^ 
January-December 1941 


INDEX NUMBER 


[January 1941= 100] 



December 1941 in Alabama, Louisiana, and South 
Carolina. Some States, on the other hand, 
experienced a much sharper reduction in general 
relief loads than the country as a whole. In 
California, for example, the liquidation of the 
State Relief Administration combined with the 
upswing in employment resulted in a drop of 62 
percent in the number of relief cases from Decem¬ 
ber 1940 to December 1941. 

In a few States particular conditions produced 
highly irregular trends. Strikes in the coal mines 
of West Virginia, for example, increased the 
number of families on relief by 45 percent in a 
single month; settlement of the strike was followed 
by a return to the previous level. 

Changes in Assistance Payments 

Adjustments of Payments to Increased Cost of 
Living 

The rise in the cost of living in 1941 was accom¬ 
panied by a general rise in levels of assistance 
payments, but the rise in payments lagged behind 
that in prices and does not appear to be commen¬ 
surate with this increase. Although a number of 


surveys in limited areas have provided a basis for 
keeping the standards for determining need abreast 
of the changes in cost of living, no satisfactory 
measure exists of the general rise m the living 
costs of recipients of assistance, as distinguished 
from others in the general population. The 
Bureau of Labor Statistics, however, estimates 
that for wage earners and lower-salaried workers 
in large cities the cost of living rose 9.7 percent from 
December 1940 to December 1941. During this 


Table 13 .—Special types of assistance and general 
relief: Average payment, by State and program, 
December 1941 


State 

Old-age 

assistance 

Aid to de¬ 
pendent 
children 
(family) 

Aid to the 
blind 

General 

relief 

Total_ 

$21. 26 

$33. 63 

$25. 80 

$24.41 

Alabama_ 

9.03 

13. 70 

8 . 98 

8 . 83 

Alaska_ 

29.17 

(') 

(2) 

(’) 

Arizona__ 

34.14 

33. 34 

32.77 

19.18 

Arkansas_ 

7. 95 

13.66 

9.19 

6.01 

California_ 

36.61 

48.86 

46. 78 

22.16 

Colorado_ 

29.91 

30. 68 

32. 68 

19. 38 

Connecticut_ 

29. 07 

45. 06 

29. 50 

31.05 

Delaware_ 

12. 33 

33.37 

(2) 

21.97 

District of Columbia_ 

26.08 

36. 96 

30.92 

24. 78 

Florida__ 

13.74 

23.53 

14. 62 

7.22 

Georgia__ 

8 . 66 

22.01 

11 . 22 

7.35 

Hawaii_ 

12.98 

37.23 

15. 39 

18. 94 

Idaho _ 

22. 87 

31.13 

23.08 

14.06 

Illinois_ _ 

24. 65 

31.46 

30.57 

23.84 

Indiana_ _ 

18. 74 

29.99 

21.19 

15. 93 

Iowa_ 

21.10 

19. 30 

24.98 

17.05 

Kansas__ 

22. 90 

33. 98 

24.01 

18.02 

Kentucky, _ _ 

9. 26 

(0 

(‘) 

0 ) 

Louisiana_ 

13.24 

26. 62 

16.99 

16.18 

Maine_ 

21.05 

40. 46 

22.85 

23.75 

Maryland_ _ 

18.58 

32.84 

22.28 

23.35 

Massachusetts_ 

29. 75 

68 .55 

23.81 

29. 36 

Michigan_ 

18.02 

42. 74 

24. 85 

25. 63 

Minnesota_ 

21.97 

34. 69 

26.90 

23. 21 

Mississippi_ 

8 . 94 

20. 29 

10.14 

3. 45 

Missouri_ 

13.01 

23.10 

(') 

15. 76 

Montana_ 

21.42 

30.11 

23.24 

16.06 

Nebraska_ 

20.03 

31.49 

21.02 

12 . 80 

Nevada. _ 

29. 67 

24. 59 

33. 65 

14. 59 

New Hampshire_ 

22.18 

46. 08 

23.25 

24. 42 

New Jersey_:_ 

22 . 21 

31.72 

24. 06 

25. 34 

New Mexico_ 

15.98 

26.53 

18.18 

11.08 

New York,. __ 

26.59 

49. 02 

27. 76 

39. 31 

North Carolina_ 

10. 23 

16. 91 

15. 02 

7. 26 

North Dakota_ 

18. 03 

31.52 

21.87 

14. 77 

Ohio_ 

23. 64 

40. 26 

20. 35 

20. 52 

Oklahoma_ 

18. 78 

19. 37 

20.09 

(®) 

Oregon_ 

22.16 

43. 38 

26. 49 

19. 51 

Pennsylvania_ 

22. 64 

37. 67 

29. 76 

19. 25 

Rhode Island _ 

21. 63 

46. 32 

21.64 

» 38.16 

South Carolina_ 

10.11 

16. 42 

10. 40 

8 . 33 

South Dakota_^_ 

18. 95 

28.29 

15.14 

14.45 

Tennessee_ 

10.28 

18. 70 

11.44 

(’) 

Texas_ 

19.13 

19. 98 

23. 25 

9. 27 

Utah_ 

26.88 

43. 71 

27.19 

27.12 

Vermont_ 

17. 22 

32.48 

‘ 22.15 

19. 74 

Virginia_ 

10.17 

20.10 

12. 70 

10.12 

Washington_ 

33.13 

40. 76 

35.40 

20.85 

West Virginia_ 

17. 24 

30. 30 

21.94 

11.06 

Wisconsin_ 

23.15 

38. 90 

23. 86 

25.75 

Wyoming_ 

24. 28 

33. 22 

26.09 

16.50 


■ Not computed because data on cases and payments estimated. 

2 No program in operation. 

3 Data not available. 

< Status of program not known. 

« Not computed because unduplicated count of cases receiving assistance 
under State and local programs not available. 

« State program only. 


























































































































13 


period, costs of food increased 16,2 percent, rent 
3.1 percent, and clothing 13.0 percent. The 
lower the income available for living expenses the 
greater the significance of the amount available 
for expenditures for food; hence it seems probable 
that families mainly dependent on public assist¬ 
ance experienced more than a 9.7-percent rise in 
their cost of living. 

Prices of goods and services have risen much 
more sharply in some places than in others. 
Costs have varied also among mdividual families 
as well as from place to place. For instance, the 
impact of rising prices has been felt more by 
families which must buy all the goods and services 
they consume than by those who own their homes 
or produce part of their food and fuel. 

The effect of increasing costs of living has been 
offset somewhat by increases in wage scales or in 
the number of hours of employment under several 
Federal work programs. On November 1, 1941, 
the WPA put into effect a wage scale providing 
increases of $5.20 per month for all workers on 
nondefense projects, except the professional and 
technical groups who received an increase of $3.90. 
Earnings on defense projects under the WPA rose 
because of an increase in hours worked. On 
! July 1, 1941, the number of hours worked on the 
out-of-school work program of the NYA was in¬ 
creased and the maximum wage on defense train¬ 
ing projects was raised $4 to $5 per month, 
depending upon the region. 


The Farm Security Administration endeavored 
in 1941, through its rehabilitation program, to 
reach even more farmers than this program had 
previously aided. The subsistence payments 
given to these farmers in 1941 provided for certain 
household and clothing needs in addition to the 
food formerly provided. 

Other public assistance agencies have also 
recognized increasing living costs and have in 
general attempted to raise amounts of payments. 
Average payments for old-age assistance, aid to 
dependent children, aid to the blind, and general 
relief have risen slightly in the United States, as 
shown below, and have risen by varying amounts 
in the great majority of States (table 14). 


Program 

Average payment 

Decem¬ 
ber 1940 

Decem¬ 
ber 1941 

Old-age assistance, recipient__ _ __ 

$20.26 
32.69 
23. 47 
24.28 

$21.26 
33.63 
25.80 
24. 41 

Aid to dependent children, family_ _ 

Aid to the blind, recipient--__ 

General relief, case...... 


The averages serve as rough measures of levels of 
assistance payments although they do not, of 
course, measure average income of recipients. 
No information is available to indicate whether, 
in general, there has been an appreciable rise in 
the resources of recipients which the assistance 
payments are intended to supplement. Such in¬ 
formation would be essential in appraising the 


Table 14 .—Special types of assistance and general relief: States in which average payment increased or decreased 

by fl or more from December 1940 to December 1941, by program 


Amount 

Old-age assistance 

Aid to dependent children i 
(family) 

Aid to the blind 

General relief 

INCREASE 




Colorado. 

Arizona, Rhode Island, Utah, 
Washington. 

Oregon, Wisconsin. 
Connecticut, Michigan, Mis¬ 
souri, New Mexico, West 
Virginia. 

Kansas, Massachusetts, Ohio, 
Vermont, Wyoming. 

Nevada. 

Pennsylvania. 

California. 

Q AfUQ QQ 


South Dakota_ 


fi nn fi QQ 


Illinois, Washington_ 


A HA-fi QQ 


West Virginia_ 


fk AA_^ QQ 


Utah....r..... 

Arizona, Colorado_ 

4 00-4 QQ 

Utah.. 

Kansas, Oklahoma.. 

District of Columbia, Nevada, 
Oklahoma, Washington, 

West Virginia. 

Rhode Island_ 



Oregon__ 

2.00-2.99..-__ 

1.00-1.99... 

DECREASE 

$1.00-1.99_ 

2.00-2.99...--- 

Illinois, Kansas, Montana, 
South Carolina. 

Connecticut, Florida, Michi¬ 
gan, New Jersey, New York, 
North Dakota, Rhode Is¬ 
land. 

California, Colorado, Mis¬ 
souri, New Mexico. 

California, Michigan, New 
York. 

Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Lou¬ 
isiana, Maine, Maryland, 
Montana, Pennsylvania, 
Wisconsin. 

Massachusetts, Missouri- 

Connecticut, Kansas, Mon¬ 
tana, New York, Utah. 

Florida, Iowa, Louisiana, 
Michigan, Mississippi, Ore¬ 
gon. 

California, Wyoming... 

South Dakota-- 






I Excludes 2 States which had no State-wide program in operation in December 1940. 




















































14 


adequacy of the adjustments made in payments 
to meet higher living costs. 

State changes .—Changes of less than $1 in 
average payments from December 1940 to Decem¬ 
ber 1941 predominate. Such small changes may 
not reflect significant changes in adequacy of 
assistance. States in which average payments 


Chart 2 .—Effect of maximums on amounts of pay¬ 
ments: Percentage distribution of payments for 
special types of public assistance, by amount, in 
selected States, November 1941 




AMOUNT OF PAYMENT IN 00UAA5 


t 2.8 percent of payments exceeded $70. 


Chart 3 .—Effect of no maximums on amounts of pay¬ 
ments: Percentage distribution of payments for 
special types of public assistance, by amount, in 
selected States, November 1941 

PERCENT 
10 




KANSAS t 
OLO'AGE ASSfSTANCe 


—n-1 I I 

60 65 70 



t 0.8 percent of payments exceeded $70. 

* 7.6 percent of payments exceeded $70. 

under each program mcreased or decreased by $1 
or more are shown in table 14. A few States 
which did not make substantial increases in 1941 
had made such increases in 1940. 

The rise in the cost of living was not the only 
factor influencmg levels of payments. Federal 
participation in the programs of aid to dependent 
children in South Dakota and Illinois, which 
came under the Social Security Act late in 1940 
and in 1941, respectively, caused average pay¬ 
ments in these States to rise sharply. Some ad¬ 
justments of payments to meet rising living costs 
have occurred without increasing average pay¬ 
ments. Because of changes in the characteristics 
of case loads, such as the declme in the number of 
persons per general relief case, standards for 
determining amounts of assistance may have been 
maintained or raised without a rise in average 
payments. 

Influence of Prescribed Maximums 

Sometimes increases in payments .affect only 
a small proportion of recipients and are not dis¬ 
tributed over the entire case load. In some 
States average payments have increased because 





























15 


/ 


prescribed maximums on the amounts of payments 
were raised or were removed in 1941, affecting 
the group of payments which had formerly been 
limited by maximum amounts of assistance. 


At the end of 1941, maximums were still pre¬ 
scribed by State law or agency policy for 45 of 
the 51 programs of old-age assistance, 36 of the 
44 programs of aid to the blind administered under 


Chart 4 .—Effect of variations in availability of funds: Percentage distribution of payments for special types of public 

assistance, by amount, in selected States, November 1941 


PeftCENT 
e 5 I- 



to 


5 


O 






t 8.4 percent of payments exceeded $70. 
465439°—42-3 














































16 


the Social Security Act, and 27 of the 47 programs 
of aid to dependent children operated under the 
act. In 1941,^ about one-eighth of the payments 
of old-age assistance in these States, roughly 
one-fifth of the payments of aid to the blind, and 
more than one-third of the payments of aid to 
dependent children were already at the highest 
amount permitted by State regulations. 

In several States the proportions of payments 
at the prescribed maximums were much higher 
than in the country as a whole. For example, 
more than 42 percent of old-age assistance pay- 

< Data for old-age assistance and aid to the blind are based on reports for 
November 1941; data for aid to dependent children on reports for May 1941. 


ments in Arizona, nearly 44 percent in the District 
of Columbia, and about 60 percent in California 
were for maximum amounts. In 10 States, more 
than half of all payments for aid to dependent 
children were at the maximum amounts and 
consequently could not be increased to meet 
rising living costs. 

Administrative Limitations 

Changes in amounts of payments may lag 
behind increases in the cost of living for legal and 
administrative reasons also. The development 
and use of sound administrative standards and 
procedures for equitable determination of need 


Table 15.—Old-age assistance: Payments to recipients, by State and month, 1941 


[In dollars; corrected to Feb. 15, 1942] 


state 

Total 

January 

February 

March 

April 

May 

June 

July 

August 

Septem¬ 

ber 

October 

Novem¬ 

ber 

Decem¬ 

ber 

Total 1_ 

542,301,101 

42,590,374 

43,068,075 

43,528,447 

43,951,948 

44,186,359 

45,754,779 

45,403,047 

45,761,626 

46,256,821 

46,928,895 

47,295,058 

47,575,672 

Alabama_ 

2, 220,905 

185,903 

185,584 

185, 719 

184,649 

183,109 

183, 613 

183,507 

185,004 

185,841 

184, 446 

186,203 

187, 327 

Alaska__ 

543,193 

44,128 

44,313 

44,883 

44,813 

44,828 

45, 633 

46,091 

45, 711 

45,671 

45,594 

45, 794 

45, 734 

Arizona.... 

3, 297,254 

239,622 

240,860 

242,406 

244,422 

247,249 

250,286 

290,881 

300,495 

305,082 

308,438 

312,033 

315,480 

Arkansas... 

2, 376,994 

199,032 

198,668 

198, 704 

199,526 

200,715 

200,367 

198, 740 

197,498 

195, 712 

194,498 

192,892 

200; 642 

Caiifornia.. 

69, 502,081 

5,744, 940 

5,774,867 

5,809,531 

5,844,102 

5,876, 537 

5,908,628 

5,661,943 

5, 747, 670 

5, 776,092 

5, 778,874 

5, 783, 546 

5,795,351 

Colorado ^_ 

17,004, 284 

1,451,991 

1,701,723 

1,167,002 

1,131,300 

1,263, 384 

1, 437,803 

1, 525,409 

1,356, 718 

1,529,639 

1,618,027 

1,538, 313 

1, 282', 975 

Connecticut_ 

5,976, 393 

492,405 

444, 652 

495, 651 

482,520 

501,611 

487,435 

503,847 

514,388 

509,094 

512,694 

515,119 

516; 977 

Delaware__ 

347,888 

28,431 

28,009 

28,158 

27,949 

28,744 

29,102 

28,887 

29,127 

29,465 

29, 718 

29,934 

30,364 

Dist. of Columbia. 

1,082,509 

87,824 

87,951 

88, 298 

89, 348 

90,049 

89,950 

90,203 

90,544 

90, 673 

92,209 

92,617 

92; 843 

Florida_ .. 

5,980, 300 

476,480 

477, 606 

482, 565 

488,002 

494, 286 

495, 298 

495,946 

499,118 

505,196 

512,284 

521,179 

532, 340 

Georgia.... 

5,039,382 

340,026 

349,125 

376,874 

399,944 

420, 339 

430,811 

437,082 

439, 645 

442, 679 

445, 334 

466, 779 

490, 744 

Hawaii.... 

278,866 

23,031 

22,849 

22, 751 

23,094 

23,166 

23,226 

23,562 

23, 372 

23, 553 

23,449 

23, 261 

23, 552 

Idaho_ 

2,561,474 

204, 666 

206, 241 

207, 656 

209,214 

210,080 

212,108 

214,541 

216,419 

217,571 

219,405 

221, 221 

222,352 

Iliinois..._ 

41,040,666 

3,169,888 

3, 208,702 

3,257,443 

3, 306,854 

3, 350,243 

3,397,249 

3,442, 398 

3,494,185 

3,538,987 

3, 576, 728 

3, 620,025 

3, 677; 964 

Indiana_ 

15,081,979 

1, 222, 298 

1, 224, 364 

1,229,161 

1,231,507 

1,240,747 

1,245,231 

1, 255,123 

1,265, 539 

1, 277,422 

1, 288, 513 

1,296,872 

1, 305, 202 

Iowa... 

14,283,883 

1,172,997 

1,174, 611 

1,176,258 

1,180,066 

1,185,199 

1,190,417 

1,194,292 

1,196, 559 

1,201, 203 

1, 201, 755 

1,204,945 

1, 205; 581 

Kansas... 

7,198,731 

567, 956 

571,121 

577,682 

569,244 

554,393 

559,886 

567,448 

591,561 

616, 641 

644, 691 

675, 248 

702,860 

Kentucky.. 

6,195,134 

483,369 

482, 759 

491,678 

497,356 

504, 258 

516,810 

520,852 

526,129 

532, 299 

539,023 

545; 841 

554; 760 

Louisiana_ 

5, 636,835 

443,189 

456,037 

469,162 

476,502 

481,739 

482, 792 

472,701 

470,001 

469,326 

470,260 

472,040 

473,086 

Maine ... 

3, 367,539 

272,292 

268,445 

265,512 

265,876 

262, 320 

260,555 

273,296 

283,396 

291,947 

302, 728 

307,477 

313, 695 

Maryland_ 

3,851,799 

322,803 

322,447 

322,131 

322,560 

321,590 

320, 302 

319,613 

318,342 

317,972 

319,033 

322,324 

322, 682 

Massachusetts_ 

30,460, 577 

2,515,118 

2,529,853 

2,539,900 

2, 532,040 

2,523,862 

2, 517,562 

2, 515,539 

2,520,930 

2,527,200 

2,566, 731 

2,559,181 

2, 6I2; 661 

Michigan_ 

18,159,954 

1,322, 331 

1,343,913 

1,371,568 

1,403,798 

1,459, 247 

1,520,820 

1,560, 798 

1,589,738 

1, 612,413 

1,636, 635 

1,660,442 

1, 678; 251 

Minnesota_ 

16,253, 297 

1, 332,163 

1, 331, 635 

1,333,450 

1, 337,217 

1, 343,102 

1,349,108 

1,356,674 

1,361,735 

1,366,670 

1,369,513 

1, 375, 725 

i, 396; 305 

Mississippi_ 

2,807,843 

220,272 

222,090 

225,664 

227,507 

230,441 

233, 261 

235,502 

236,432 

240,051 

243,761 

245, 250 

' 247; 612 

Missouri_ 

20,891,251 

1,949, 008 

1,950, 256 

1,969,982 

1,997,340 

2,018,397 

2,039,891 

1,452,045 

1,477,080 

1,490,072 

1,503,309 

1,516,824 

1,527,047 

Montana.. 

3,043,942 

239,074 

241,842 

245,075 

247,479 

251,403 

253, 613 

255,574 

257,970 

259,439 

260,734 

263, 696 

268; 043 

Nebraska. . 

6,422,166 

552,075 

553,508 

555, 607 

488,897 

492,124 

496, 619 

499,169 

502,985 

505,848 

588,047 

592,020 

595,267 

Nevada... 

759, 268 

61,219 

61,120 

61,111 

61,519 

61,731 

61, 653 

62,339 

63,460 

64,282 

66,135 

67,092 

67; 607 

New Hampshire... 

1,829, 649 

142,620 

144,818 

147,216 

148,832 

149, 367 

151,579 

153,290 

154,967 

156,836 

158, 369 

161, 267 

I6O; 488 

New Jersey. _ 

8,033,287 

659, 394 

662,287 

663,900 

663,210 

663,150 

666,321 

666,086 

667,260 

673,984 

678, 749 

682, 773 

686,173 

New Mexico__ 

989,435 

84,433 

86,187 

86,915 

85,268 

83,523 

81,944 

81, 681 

80,515 

79,781 

79; 641 

79,000 

8O; 547 

New York__ 

36,753,002 

3,038,041 

3,025,935 

3,016, 784 

2,974, 364 

2,995, 632 

3,002, 798 

3,027,725 

3,066,380 

3,023,462 

3,139, 505 

3, 206,189 

3, 236,187 

North Carolina_ 

4,621, 754 

374,706 

374,529 

375,879 

378,091 

380,666 

382, 350 

386, 708 

388,440 

390, 741 

393; 627 

396i 284 

399, 733 

North Dakota_ 

1,941,113 

151, 562 

152, 623 

154,478 

156,237 

158,019 

160, 772 

164,922 

166,822 

167,039 

168,444 

169| 686 

170, 509 

Ohio_ 

38, 528,940 

3,095,548 

3,115,203 

3,143,953 

3,169, 776 

3,195,429 

3, 218, 350 

3,238,102 

3, 246,467 

3, 258, 334 

3, 268,886 

3, 279' 913 

3,298; 979 

Oklahoma_ 

16,582,105 

1, 346,048 

1, 348,275 

1, 352, 744 

1, 358, 319 

1,369,914 

1, 377,052 

1,383,836 

1,388,158 

1, 395, 273 

1, 399, 582 

i, 40i; 567 

i, 46i; 337 

Oregon__ ... 

5,438,934 

422,099 

426, 656 

431,426 

436,187 

441,832 

451,153 

457, 392 

463,510 

468,941 

474, 348 

480^ 952 

484,438 

Pennsylvania_ 

27, 222,426 

2,193,937 

2,202,115 

2,105,893 

2,270,817 

2, 302, 797 

2, 323, 311 

2, 302,167 

2, 319,021 

2, 306,207 

2, 295,688 

2, 303i 417 

2,297,056 

Rhode Island- ... 

1,753,477 

139, 665 

139,121 

139,062 

139,878 

140,689 

142, 282 

144, 624 

147,190 

150,554 

' 153,592 

156; 734 

160,086 

South Carolina_ 

1,809, 270 

136,287 

134,092 

127,433 

128,556 

133,739 

140,566 

143, 709 

150, 755 

159,389 

169, 111 

186,870 

198, 76.8 

South Dakota_ 

3,419, 221 

287,436 

286, 749 

286, 396 

286,241 

287,150 

286, 618 

285, 384 

282,082 

282,792 

282, 642 

282,458 

273 

Tennessee_ 

4,863,974 

406,164 

406,673 

407, 320 

406,862 

407,601 

407,567 

406,930 

406,494 

405,571 

403,313 

400, 997 

398,482 

Texas_ 

28, 273,246 

1,682,215 

1,710, 788 

1,771,009 

1,838,175 

1,522, 641 

2,565,321 

2,660,682 

2, 750, 625 

2,811,305 

2,904,805 

2,985; 574 

3,070,106 

Utah_ 

4,521,930 

309,484 

363,959 

369,083 

374, 266 

377,843 

381,130 

383,841 

388,353 

390,592 

392,512 

394; 750 

117 

Vermont_ 

1,156,214 

85,825 

96, 336 

98, 236 

98,170 

98,043 

97,515 

97, 476 

97, 646 

97,878 

96' 971 

96,242 

95,_876 

Virginia_ 

2,418,007 

197,067 

197,232 

197,887 

198, 718 

199,899 

201,104 

202,531 

203,178 

204,249 

205,155 

205; 037 

205, 9.56 

Washington_ 

20,988,926 

921, 613 

929, 976 

1, 644,021 

1,745,914 

1,822,527 

1,877,633 

1,923,468 

1,962, 357 

1,999,128 

2,028,885 

2,056,842 

2, 07fi 

West Virginia_ 

3, 677,467 

260,167 

262, 528 

265, 360 

271, 337 

279,329 

286,966 

293,582 

309, 635 

337, 585 

356,388 

373, 216 

3fi1 374 

Wisconsin_ 

14, 797,282 

1, 208, 783 

1,213, 560 

1,217,878 

1,223, 625 

1, 227,185 

1,227,896 

1,230, 769 

1, 235, 277 

1,244', 213 

1, 250,935 

1, 255, 208 

1, 261,9.5.8 

Wyoming_ 

1,015,055 

82,749 

83, 282 

83,992 

84,460 

84,491 

84,522 

84,140 

84, 743 

84,927 

85,181 

86,189 

86, 379 


■ All 51 States have approved plans. 


’ Includes payments to recipients 60 but under 65 years. 


i 








































































17 


are frequently hampered by State laws or inter¬ 
pretation of these laws, and by a lack of personnel 
qualified in the preparation and supervision of 
the standards for determhiing need. Further¬ 
more, the size of case loads in relation to personnel 
sometimes places a serious stram on staff time 
available for making adjustments in assistance 
plans in individual cases to conform to changed 
requirements and resources. Even though adjust¬ 
ments are under way, in many States and localities. 


it had not been possible by the end of 1941 for 
some agencies to change the amount of the pay¬ 
ments received by a substantial proportion of 
the case load. 

Influence of Inadequate Funds 

The most marked discrepancies between the need 
of the individual recipient and the amount of assist¬ 
ance received result from inadequacies of funds 
available for assistance (chart 4). This factor 


Table 16 .—Aid to dependent children: Payments to recipients, by State and month, 1941 ^ 


[In dollars; corrected to Feb. 15, 1942] 


State 

Total 

January 

1 

February 1 

March 

April 

May 

June 

July 

August 

Septem¬ 

ber 

October 

Novem¬ 

ber 

Decem¬ 

ber 

Total, 51 
States_ 

153,693,423 

12,347,075 

13,238,738 

12,815,669 

12,914,978 

12,906,228 

12,850,017 

12,616,449 

12,617,217 

12,605,498 

12,742,326 

12,885,226 

13,154,002 

Total, States 
with ap- 
proved 
plans 3_ 

150,482,946 

12,027,711 

12,928,408 

12,496,492 

12,595,815 

12,582,640 

/ 

12,532,362 

12,297,714 

12,297,580 

12,293,201 

12,604,077 

12,768,341 

13,068,606 

Alabama_ 

969,053 

80,586 
3,157 
81,095 

80,615 

81,827 

81,400 

80,319 

80,009 

80,207 

81, 525 

81,811 

80,367 

80,448 

79,939 

Alaska 3_ 

38, ns 
969,447 

1,032,662 
8,910,480 
2, 291,405 
* 652,756 
242, 532 

3,167 

3,167 

3,167 

3,300 

3,300 

3,300 

3,300 

3,300 

3,300 
80,868 

3,300 

3,300 

Arizona__ 

80,068 

79,700 

79,753 

80,251 

81,112 

80,936 

81,441 

81,350 

81,347 

81, 526 

Arkansas_ 

85,645 
738,599 

86,304 

86 ,494 

87,360 

88,032 

87,254 
758,008 

86,904 

86,175 

86,238 

84,823 

83,492 

84,941 

California_ 

742,782 

749,029 

756, 248 

757,404 

754,371 

743,419 

733,184 

723,886 

722,830 

730,721 

Colorado_ 

191, 780 

192,183 

194,342 

195,373 

194,496 

192,636 

190,108 

189, 596 

188,401 

186,548 

187, 514 

188,428 

Connecticut_ 

60,886 
19, 569 

6i, 671 

69,983 

67,347 

68,099 

66,173 

55,376 

64,076 

51,376 

61,773 

44,386 

50,013 

Delaware_ 

20,250 

20,947 

21,286 

21,371 

21,770 

20,394 

20,083 

19,670 

19,288 

18, 915 

18,989 

Dist. of Columbia. 
Florida*_ 

443, 231 

1 , 220,401 

35,920 
95,051 

35, 521 
95, 384 

35,677 
95,421 

36,215 
95,424 

36,948 
95,550 

36,611 
94,515 

37,261 
92,984 

38,092 
97,639 

37,664 
101,954 

37,797 
no. 334 

37,728 
117,177 

37,997 
128,968 

Georgia_ 

1, 242,847 
517,467 

1,103, 756 

105,433 

108,294 

107, 373 

106,550 

105,466 

104,217 

102,849 

101,879 

100,754 

99,366 

99,800 

100,866 

Hawaii-._ 

45,980 

45,075 

45,053 

45,549 

45,419 

44,176 

43, 576 

40,838 

40,371 

40, 743 

40,662 

40,025 

Idaho. . _ 

88,180 

89,005 

90,044 

90, 561 

90,823 

91, 750 

92,940 

94,015 

94,098 

93,657 
* 300,533 

93,583 

95,100 

Illinois_ 

*2,692,025 

169,068 

168,361 

169,639 

170,978 

173,696 

173,636 

173,617 
476,206 

177,034 

175,100 

* 363,083 

«479,592 

Indiana.._ 

5,796,081 
791,663 
2,412,682 

494,210 

493,375 

495,415 

496,073 

497,644 

494,759 

473,515 

472, 573 

468,175 
66,886 

466,337 

467,799 

Iowa _ 

66,336 

63,701 

67,385 

68,367 

69,730 

66,878 

67, 189 

66,166 

64,386 

61,566 

64,396 

Kansas_ 

195,790 

197,327 

198,760 

198,096 

193,990 

191,992 

189,440 

192,640 

200,914 

208,621 

218,977 

226,135 

Kentucky 3. _ 

188,700 

16,100 

16,600 

16,800 

16,000 

16,600 

16,500 

16,300 

15,800 

14,800 

14,600 

16,000 

16,000 

Louisiana_ 

4,932,346 

388, 753 

404,610 

417,905 

421, 589 

429,126 

428,926 

410,765 

405, 520 

404,162 

405,132 

407,794 

408,074 

Maine _ 

778, 274 

62,958 

62, 546 

61,989 

61,662 

61,198 

61,184 

63,543 

65,644 

66,863 

69,155 

70,078 

71,454 

Maryland_ 

2,432, 684 
8,634, 008 
10, 374,147 

221,252 
742, 784 
826,868 

218,890 

219,211 

213,582 

203,188 

199,378 

195,424 

191,017 

194,005 

190,020 

191,929 

194,788 

Massachusetts.... 
Michigan__ 

750,316 
822,123 

752,405 
831,750 

743,162 
853,493 

721,345 
867,258 

710,029 

868,008 

700,694 
869,820 

692,963 
869,894 

692,298 
875,641 

712,907 
882,132 

691,689 
886,518 

723,416 
920,642 

Minnesota_ 

3,846,820 
< 307,426 

320,508 

323, 551 

325,029 

326,693 

324,426 

321,077 

317,875 

316,564 

317,061 

317,793 

317,475 

318,768 

Mississippi_ 

>673 

3 673 

3,625 

3,627 

9,940 

20, 547 

33,416 

39,576 

45,297 

48. 508 

50,194 

61, 350 

Missouri_ 

4, 376,698 

393,563 

394,337 

396,465 

403,293 

407,955 

414,829 

321,214 
75,512 

324,814 

327,354 

328,438 

332,400 

332,036 

Montana_ 

920,884 

73, 014 

74,952 

76,171 

76,794 

77,960 

77,591 

77,873 

77,625 

77,221 

Ilf 452 

ibt 1 id 

Nebraska *_ 

2.047,852 

180,669 

182,000 

182,641 

159,858 

160,374 

161,337 

159,860 

158,963 

158, 238 

180,943 

6 /U 

ifSSS 

181,299 

Nevada.. ___ 

33,03i 

3,665 

3,693 

3,631 

3,838 

3,796 

3,706 

3,687 

3,737 

3,897 

3,890 

3,903 

New Hampshire.. 
New Jersey_ 

347,999 
3, 910,329 

27,681 
363,158 

27,373 
350,704 

27,708 
349,666 

27,600 
348, 207 

26,766 
343,077 

26, 347 
331,379 

26,858 
316,367 

28,554 
311,068 

30,291 
307,421 

31,664 
302,052 

;i3, on 

299,145 
53,911 
1, 488,020 
165,688 
77,780 
475, 543 
375,332 
89,055 
2,116,697 
59,354 

64,931 

* 48,699 
263, 954 

* 14,491 
172,544 

22,974 
93,645 
211,726 
323,001 
464,094 
25,654 

34,146 

298,085 
60,428 
1,483,070 
167,485 
78,360 
482,807 
385,840 
90,622 
2,093,002 
59,291 

65,151 
49,928 
263,462 
* 28,912 
176,890 
23,189 
96,227 
212,918 
335,481 
465,977 
25,749 

New Mexico_ 

652,373 

54,542 

65,225 

55,557 

54,973 

53,878 

52,851 

52,515 

52,472 

52,473 

53,548 

New York _ 

18, 372,504 

1,601,242 

1,598,376 

1,600,331 

1,587,214 

1,545,954 
167,160 
78,213 
465,186 

1,528, 743 

1,504,691 

1,491,547 

1,474,314 

if 4t)y> 00^ 

North Carolina..- 

North Dakota_ 

Ohio _ 

1, 986,487 
926, 233 
5, 584, 757 

163,402 
76,362 
450,492 

163,860 
76,332 
455,061 

165,568 
76,971 
459,169 

166,159 
77,528 
463,374 

166,510 
78,150 
465,281 

165,541 
77,109 
464,764 

164,991 
76,658 
464,882 

165,104 
76,397 
468,455 

165,019 
76,473 
469,753 
366,107 
87, 374 
2,108,020 
59,831 

64,834 
* 47,263 
263,678 

< 6, no 

170,733 
22,477 
93, 576 
210,478 
302,908 
460,704 
25,219 

Oklahoma_ 

3,866, 513 
1,016,183 
27,148,514 
708,969 

761, 548 
* 482, 006 
3,187,876 
* 55, 559 

283, 587 

283,680 

285,979 
81, 564 

287,252 

290, 782 

298,437 

318,920 

337,991 

352,606 

Oregon _ 

79,281 

80,798 

82, 596 

83,409 

84,481 

84,404 

86,108 

86,491 

Pennsylvania_ 

Rhode Island. 

South Carolina_ 

South Dakota... . 

Tpmipsspp. _ 

1,960,519 
59,596 

49,961 
* 23,148 
266,270 

2,812,441 
58,772 

51,981 
* 28,135 
266,910 

2 , 281,968 
58,469 

59,701 
* 32,814 
267,312 

2,360,108 
59,019 

63,877 
* 36,330 
266,949 

2,365,598 
58,858 

67,172 
* 39,282 
267,136 

2,339,076 
59, 384 

70,388 
* 41,214 
266,617 

2,264,901 
58,792 

69,052 
* 43,844 
266,098 

2,252,402 
58,794 

67,827 
* 44,938 
265, 280 

2,193, 782 
58,809 

66,673 
* 46,411 
264,210 
640 
171,049 
22,220 
93, 208 
207,725 
281,605 
452,315 
25, 226 

Texas _ 

689 

674 

693 

686 

678 

665 

666 

666 
171, 301 
21,974 
91,310 
198,071 
252,692 
449,608 
25, 527 

Utah _ 

1,985, 749 

144,073 

146,193 

162,659 

165,529 

166,964 

168,343 

169,471 

Vermont_ 

255,086 

20, 292 

20,134 

20,175 

20,164 

19,961 

20,041 

2if 485 

Virginia _ 

1,064,090 

81,125 

82,366 

83,798 

85,465 

86,408 
189,068 

86,868 

90,094 

Washington_ 

2, 262,051 

159,840 

160, 061 

161, 536 

164,844 

192,365 

193,419 
235,578 
452,143 
25,369 

West Vfrginia_ 

Wisconsin _ 

3,028,830 
5, 591,332 

203,270 
478,140 

207, 411 
479,495 

212,437 
482,039 

218,350 
482,100 

224,763 
467,267 

231,334 
457,450 

Wyoming__ 

298, 946 

23, 523 

23, 602 

23,898 

24, 536 

25, 255 

25,388 














* Figures in italics represent programs administered under State laws from 
State and/or local funds without Federal participation. 

* In January and February 43 States made payments under approved pmns; 
Mississippi was added in March, Ulinois and Texas in October, and Con¬ 
necticut in December. 

3 Estimated. 


* Includes program administered under State law without Federal partici- 

^ »In addition, payments were made from local funds without State or Fed¬ 
eral participation to families under State mothers’-pension law; some of these 
famUies also received aid under approved plan. 















































































18 


has often determined the amount of the maximum 
payment imposed by a legislature or administra¬ 
tive agency. Shortage of funds usually is a more 
acute problem for programs which depend in 
whole or in part on local and State funds than for 
programs financed wholly or chiefly from Federal 
funds. The increase in November 1941 in WPA 
earnings, paid wholly from Federal funds, affected 
all persons employed under this program through¬ 
out the United States. On the other hand, some 


States were unable to increase assistance pay¬ 
ments, and frequently increases which were made 
were not uniform throughout the State. Pay¬ 
ments for general relief, in which there is no Fed¬ 
eral participation, showed the least rise. 

Even before the advance in the cost of living, 
payments in several States—usually those with 
the least adequate resources—did not meet the 
amount of need as determined by the agency. 
The rise m the cost of living has accentuated these 


Table 17.—Aid to the blind: Payments to recipients, by State and month, 1941 * 


{Corrected to Feb. 15,1942] 


State 

Total 

January 

February 

March 

April 

May 

June 

July 

August 

Septem¬ 

ber 

October 

Novem¬ 

ber 

Decem¬ 

ber 

Total, 48 














States 

$22,915,334 

$1,868,991 

$1,871,900 

$1,871,126 

$1,886,170 

$1,897,492 

$1,896,881 

$1,889375 

$1,906,586 

$1,911,059 

$1,950,333 

$1,970,415 

$1,994, 506 

Total, States 
with ap- 
proved 














plans >_ 

14,281,374 

1,152,204 

1,156,964 

1,161,797 

1,166,928 

1,175,087 

1,179,336 

1,170, 627 

1,184,254 

1,193,629 

1, 231,300 

1,246,990 

1. 263,358 

Alabama_ 

67,521 

5,434 

5,511 

5,657 

5,643 

5,683 

5,677 

6,583 

5,676 

5,664 

5,719 

5,754 

5,720 

Arizona_ 

140, 467 

10,327 

10,455 

10, 587 

10,847 

10,983 

11,069 

12,034 

12,418 

12 ; 708 

13,003 

12,930 

13,106 

Arkansas_ 

124, 457 

10,249 

10,307 

10,273 

10,360 

10,418 

10,381 

10, 399 

10,456 

10,310 

10,411 

10,286 

10,608 

California_ 

4,143, 709 

350,322 

350,342 

350, 478 

351,085 

350, 932 

350,839 

‘ 337,408 

‘ 339, 338 

‘ 340,969 

‘ 340,753 

‘ 340,340 

* 340,913 

Colorado.. 

224,303 

16,639 

16,845 

16,810 

16,812 

18,491 

19,145 

19,310 

19,540 

19, 762 

20,038 

20,321 

20,590 

Connecticut ‘ ... 

74,081 

5,841 

5,350 

6,160 

6,018 

6,085 

6,761 

6,763 

6,635 

6,386 

6,080 

6,777 

6.225 

Dist. of Columbia.. 

84,222 

6,040 

6,295 

6,462 

6,777 

7,039 

7,148 

7,096 

7,260 

7,188 

7,424 

7,609 

7,884 

Florida ‘. 

428, 845 

32,998 

33,137 

33,675 

34,229 

35,287 

35, 331 

36,881 

36,258 

37,002 

37,642 

38,347 

39,158 

Georgia. 

205, 799 

14,490 

14,910 

15,636 

16,156 

16,763 

17,088 

17,474 

17,697 

18,153 

18,324 

19,102 

20,006 

Hawaii_ 

13,478 

1,043 

1,070 

1,104 

1,089 

1,060 

1,041 

1,094 

1,140 

1,162 

1, 244 

1, 246 

1,185 

Idaho_ 

76, 217 

6,247 

6,262 

6,352 

6,288 

6,235 

6,249 

6,369 

6,379 

6,430 

6,424 

6,519 

6,463 

Illinois_ 

g, 711,76S 

gSl,68i 

917,696 

996,684 

930,445 

997,373 

993,437 

991,997 

994,409 

918,765 

999,077 

994 ,188 

934,016 

Indiana__ 

593,176 

49,288 

49,428 

49.446 

36.447 

49, 439 

49, 271 

49, 363 

49,201 

49, 223 

49,323 

49, 610 

49,724 

49,860 

Iowa_ 

444, 579 

35,962 

36, 255 

36, 490 

36, 542 

36,719 

37,026 

37,040 

37,460 

37,899 

38; 168 

38, 571 

Kansas_ 

361, 015 

29,424 

29,904 

30,257 

29,933 

29,288 

28,915 

28,786 

29,744 

29,735 

30, 709 

3i; 792 

32 ; 528 

Louisiana.. 

250,386 

19,284 

19,818 

20,331 

20,654 

21,048 

21,692 

21,136 

20,997 

21, 031 

21,146 

21 ; 434 

21,815 

Maine_ 

297,092 

25,467 

24,942 

24,741 

24,590 

24,370 

24,333 

24, 362 

24, 568 

24,700 

24,999 

24 ; 967 

25,063 

Maryland_ 

173, 250 

14,680 

14,698 

14, 518 

14,614 

14, 642 

14,472 

14, 319 

14, 267 

14,182 

14,161 

14 ; 401 

14 ; 396 

Massachusetts_ 

333,661 

27,467 

27,260 

27,505 

27, 706 

27,867 

27,882 

27,957 

28,193 

28,278 

28,024 

27 ; 877 

27,645 

Michigan _ 

361,802 

26,400 

27,132 

28,047 

28,719 

29,192 

29,766 

29,999 

31,069 

31,865 

32, 752 

33 ; 383 

33 ; 478 

Minnesota_ 

315, 565 

25,398 

25, 610 

25,757 

25,801 

26,156 

26,200 

26, 529 

26,448 

26,854 

26,761 

27,020 

27,031 

Mississippi_ 

118,955 

8,083 

8,305 

8,511 

8,658 

8,821 

9,277 

9,447 

10,064 

11,144 

11 ; 868 

12.268 

12 ; 509 

Missouri *_ 

1,007,6g7 

86,147 

86,666 

84,639 

86,304 

86,664 

86,304 

89,800 

89,800 

89,800 

89,664 

81,016 

80,936 

Montana_ 

70,129 

4,665 

4,879 

5,163 

6,308 

5,467 

5, 763 

6,193 

6,292 

6,417 

6,481 

6,738 

6,7&8 

Nebraska ‘_ 

181,899 

14,493 
S68 

14,561 

14, 515 

14, 573 

14,799 

16,027 

15,167 

15, 399 

15, 693 

15 ; 925 

15,953 

15, 894 

Nevada_ 

7,856 

458 

498 

636 

648 

698 

778 

798 

900 

795 

'785 

876 

New Hampshire.. 

90, 624 

7,191 

7,414 

7,503 
17,782 

7,330 

7,480 

7,559 

7,692 

7,613 

7,776 

7,764 

7,682 

7,720 

New Jersey _ 

212, 668 

17,468 

17,699 

17,927 

17,818 

17,531 

17,603 

17,825 

17,819 

17, 779 

17 ; 784 

17 ; 633 

New Mexico.. 

50,110 

4,171 

4,288 

4,225 

4,159 

4,088 

4,068 

4,014 

3,978 

4,279 

4 ; 267 

4 ; 301 

4 ; 272 

New York_ 

894,954 

72,881 

72,869 

72,653 

72,425 

72,923 

73,171 

73,982 

75,878 

75, 364. 

76,970 

77 ; 868 

77 ; 970 

North Carolina_ 

357,362 

28,310 

28,332 

28,384 

28,489 

28,602 

28,601 

29,779 

30, 721 

30,893 

31,169 

31,684 

32,498 

North Dakota. 

46, 484 

4,952 

4,942 

4,957 

4,952 

4,830 

4,241 

2,865 

2,871 

2,878 

2 ; 951 

2 ; 983 

3, 062 
81; 

Ohio__ 

967, 493 

79,586 

80,485 

80,739 

81,244 

81, 274 

80, 360 

79, 874 

80,095 

80;643 

80;928 

80 ; 963 

Oklahoma_ 

446, 073 

34,514 

34, 331 

34,319 

34,475 

34,564 

35, 334 

36,578 

37,968 

39 ; 267 

39,996 

40; 846 

43,881 
12,584 
416,399 

Oregon __ 

142, 316 

11,400 

11,411 

11,383 

11,298 
409,968 

11, 459 

11, 696 

11, 732 

12,194 

12,284 

12, 399 

12 ; 576 

Pennsylvania. 

4, 906, 7«4 

S99,698 

401,198 

398,608 

407,990 

407,986 

413,773 

414,339 

414 ,966 

413 ,497 

417,437 

Rhode Island_ 

20,896 

1,289 

1,417 

1, 548 

1,583 

1,596 

7,984 

1,677 

1,659 

1,739 

1,965 

2,057 

2, il5 

■ 2 ; 251 
8,384 
3,830 
18,480 

South Carolina_ 

95,646 

8,058 

7,972 

7,314 

7,606 

8,223 

8,095 

8,067 

7 ; 994 

7 ; 973 

8 076 

South Dakota_ 

52,159 

4,445 

4,559 

4,571 

4,623 

4,718 

4,734 

4,696 

4,337 

3 ; 964 

3 ; 845 

3,837 

18,245 

Tennessp.e 

Texas_ 

220,218 

107,063 

18,345 

18,386 

18,369 

18,335 

18,362 

18,413 

18,412 

18; 409 

18; 274 

is; 188 

29 199 

Utah__ 

57,114 

4,729 

4,754 

4,763 

4,730 

4,760 

4,807 

4,788 

4,772 

4,741 

4,676 

4, 791 

4,813 
3,611 
13, 517 
36, 670 
21,063 
46,651 
3,548 

Vermont_ 

40,754 

3,193 

3,125 

3,125 

3,252 

3,382 

3,455 

3,442 

3,609 

3,619 

3 ; 529 

3,612 
13, 382 
36,493 
20 791 

Virginia.. 

158,104 

12,972 

13, 053 

13,027 

13,003 

12,989 

12,923 

13,129 

13; 357 

13,381 

13 ; 371 

Washington__ 

421, 763 

32,485 

32, 593 

32,462 

32, 570 

35,473 

35,734 

36,854 

37 ; 030 

36; 836 

36; 563 

West Virginia_ 

206,347 

14,826 

14,989 

15,349 

15,450 

15, 612 

15,982 

16, 374 

17 ; 249 

18,813 

19 ; 849 

Wisconsin__ 

562, 462 

47,220 

47,137 

46,949 

46,788 

46,964 

46,850 

46, 683 

46; 737 

46,913 

46; 847 

46, 723 
3,625 

Wyoming.... 

46,156 

3,928 

3,932 

3,943 

4,000 

4,080 

4,039 

3,843 

3,815 

3 ; 720 

3, 683 


• Figures in italics represent programs administered under State laws 
from State and/or local funds without Federal participation. 

> Delaware and Alaska do not have programs; information on status of 
program in Kentucky not available. 

> For January-September, 43 States made payments under approved plans; 
Texas was added in October. 


‘ Includes program administered under State law without Federal par¬ 
ticipation. ^ 

‘ Estimated. 









































































19 


inadequacies in assistance payments. To ensure 
as nearly equitable treatment as possible, a State 
agency administering the special types of public 
assistance sometimes instructs local agencies to 
provide a uniform proportion of the total require¬ 
ments of the recipient even though this propor¬ 
tion is less than the amount of established 
need. 

As of November 1941, provisions for uniform 
reduction of payments were in effect in at least 
seven States for aid to the blind, eight States for 
aid to dependent children, and nine States for 


old-age assistance. Some of these States pro¬ 
vided that all payments must meet the same pro¬ 
portion of the budget deficit computed by the 
agency; other States had the fairer provision that 
payments plus other resources must meet a speci¬ 
fied proportion of total requirements of the re¬ 
cipients. The proportions prescribed by the 
States range from 50 to 90 percent. In a few 
States 75 percent, originally established as a 
minimum proportion, had become the proportion 
to be applied uniformly. Three States had max¬ 
imum proportions ranging from two-thirds to 


Table 18 .—General relief in the continental United States: Payments to cases, by State and month, 1941 


[In dollars; corrected to Feb. 15, 1942] 


State 

Total 

January 

February 

March 

April 

May 

June 

July 

August 

Septem¬ 

ber 

October 

Novem¬ 

ber 

Decem¬ 

ber 

Total 1_ 

272,869,000 

30,555,000 

28,883,000 

28,769,000 

26,279,000 

23,280,000 

20,581,000 

19,828,000 

19,645,000 

18,546,000 

18,591,000 

18,438,000 

19, 474,000 

Alabama- 

251,810 

20,662 

21, 061 

21,081 

21, 366 

21,675 

21,373 

21, 236 

21,113 

20,888 

20,679 

20,583 

20,193 

Arizona.. ...- 

593, 226 

48, 323 

47, 945 

48, 901 

48, 713 

49,202 

46, 339 

48, 508 

50,604 

50,196 

49, 335 

51,068 

54,093 

Arkansas_ 

245,022 

25,426 

25,108 

24, 963 

25,045 

25,144 

15,918 

15,298 

15,002 

14,719 

14,525 

20,766 

23,108 

California ^- 

17, 938, 722 

2, 545,089 

2,373,339 

2, 347,879 

2,261, 951 

1,964,452 

1,453, 407 

21,064,595 

1,044,777 

797,365 

723,501 

662,939 

699,428 

Colorado 3_ 

2,008,466 

207, 757 

196,677 

190, 920 

188,988 

168, 795 

142, 035 

127,163 

132, 294 

140,486 

146,100 

168,198 

199,054 

Connecticut-- 

3,079,756 

377, 927 

349,099 

342, 705 

297, 685 

253,898 

218,128 

210, 941 

204,973 

198,946 

202, 529 

202,181 

220,744 

Delaware.. - 

234, 326 

25, 677 

23, 272 

26,805 

24,636 

20,850 

18,781 

15,483 

15,915 

15,629 

15, 281 

15, 628 

16,369 

Dist. of Columbia. 

637, 903 

51,980 

53, 642 

55, 537 

56, 054 

63,122 

60,988 

50, 267 

54, 529 

55,164 

54,109 

52,487 

61,024 

Florida_ 

706, 945 

59, 749 

57,417 

55, 630 

59,147 

61,364 

69, 883 

60,290 

60, 959 

58,350 

58,447 

56,606 

59,203 

Georgia.- - 

488, 008 

44,686 

42, 220 

41,138 

39, 476 

38, 367 

38, 342 

39,137 

38, 538 

39,351 

39,789 

42, 657 

44,308 

Idaho*_ 

287, 645 

36,130 

35,860 

35,752 

30,064 

20,717 

19,474 

18, 806 

19,075 

18,313 

18, 239 

17,993 

17,222 

Illinois. _ - 

32,988, 525 

3,497,601 

3, 413, 792 

3,447,014 

3,161, 225 

2,692, 220 

2, 454,103 

2, 359,853 

2, 411, 504 

2,407,018 

2,426, 576 

2, 345,733 

2,371,886 

Indiana ^_ 

5,166, 604 

683,425 

620,649 

606,377 

474, 959 

376,830 

323, 500 

327, 919 

308, 956 

342,499 

349,085 

358,931 

393,474 

Iowa__ 

3, 888, 645 

461, 736 

434, 214 

444, 795 

383, 619 

316,851 

274, 046 

265, 795 

262, 938 

246,974 

263, 777 

256,945 

286,955 

Kansas_ 

2, 473,415 

242, 231 

255,191 

239,684 

215, 220 

202,217 

179,093 

169,373 

180,317 

186,190 

189,156 

205.246 

209,497 

Kentucky A - 

565, 000 

53, 000 

57,000 

57,000 

45,000 

41,000 

44,000 

44,000 

44, 000 

43,000 

43,000 

46,000 

48,000 

Louisiana_ 

2, 336, 781 

181,537 

188,841 

198, 698 

200,637 

204,471 

205,424 

197,115 

194,179 

191,273 

190,505 

191, 736 

192,365 

Maine. _ 

1, 890, 341 

227, 618 

200. 262 

203, 644 

187, 250 

156, 071 

145,196 

128,426 

121,760 

126, 543 

129,124 

124, 762 

139,685 

Maryland--_ 

1, 970,043 

193, 242 

192, 510 

192, 965 

172, 615 

156,142 

146, 273 

145, 313 

146,911 

150,647 

147,843 

159, 930 

165,752 

Massachusetts- 

12,625,324 

1,456,943 

1, 292, 826 

1, 296, 207 

1,181, 676 

1,008, 568 

868, 801 

909, 284 

890,162 

877,867 

936, 983 

868,004 

1,038,013 

Michigan__ 

10,031, 550 

1,196, 440 

1,099,308 

1,059, 210 

964, 624 

777,164 

645, 999 

650,938 

643, 398 

658,684 

748,535 

723,083 

864,167 

Minnesota__ 

6, 821, 025 

807, 914 

792,408 

750, 842 

676, 979 

663,841 

477, 236 

444,098 

432,169 

418, 667 

430,821 

510,400 

525,650 

Mississippi ._ . .. 

31,611 

2, 734 

2,686 

2,813 

2, 707 

3,179 

2,809 

2,465 

2,456 

2,461 

2,559 

2, 391 

2,351 

Missouri_ 

3, 238,166 

363,621 

351,089 

343,441 

309, 235 

275, 212 

264, 730 

226, 827 

203,377 

206,680 

219,014 

226,652 

248,288 

Montana .. _ 

610, 564 

71,601 

64,328 

65, 621 

60,097 

49, 572 

44, 793 

42, 390 

38,139 

40,330 

40,815 

43, 023 

49, 855 

Nebraska_ 

939,375 

119,257 

120, 679 

119,094 

86,307 

72,658 

60, 697 

54, 885 

59, 558 

55, 872 

57,432 

61,020 

72, 016 

Nevada_- .. 

88,675 

7,904 

7, 702 

7, 570 

7,650 

7,500 

7,439 

6, 689 

6,767 

7, 242 

7,128 

7,540 

7,544 

New Hampshire.. 

1,351, 577 

171, 741 

154,867 

155, 435 

140, 590 

116, 916 

96,028 

93,122 

85,635 

82, 745 

83, 711 

80,634 

90,153 

New Jersey ^ _ 

8,110,097 

937,493 

889,153 

870, 789 

823,420 

687, 714 

582, 091 

552,713 

550, 575 

536,159 

534, 936 

550, 261 

594, 793 

New Mexico«- 

146, 933 

13, 819 

16, 761 

16, 320 

14,038 

13, 754 

12,412 

11,971 

10,171 

8,837 

6,152 

10,815 

12, 893 

New York _ . . 

91,359, 503 

8,987,609 

8, 917,367 

8, 916, 900 

8, 088,887 

7, 682, 527 

7,240, 571 

7,192,136 

7,266,896 

6,863,794 

6. 703, 694 

6, 737, 644 

6,861, 578 

North Carolina 

379, 442 

39,039 

36, 355 

36,042 

32, 404 

32,286 

28, 606 

29,375 

28,086 

27, 518 

27,960 

28,839 

32, 932 

North Dakota 

466, 571 

56, 265 

50, 748 

52,335 

48,796 

37,619 

32, 564 

30,147 

26, 488 

27, 786 

28,959 

32, 713 

42,151 


11, 915 ', 914 

1,455,161 

1,382,400 

1, 362,112 

1,141,675 

922,198 

782,108 

746,268 

783,421 

786,114 

799, 689 

865, 373 

889^ 395 


536,370 

60,171 

55,619 

52,407 

36,330 

37,537 

60,012 

24,431 

37,280 

47, 335 

42,396 

43, 292 

49 ,560 

Oregon_ 

Pennsylvania- 

1,411,901 

152, 919 

141,191 

137,470 

128,012 

118, 312 

108, 264 

103,496 

100,413 

99,243 

102, 679 

104, 485 

115, 417 

dO, 511, 916 

4,004,326 

3,408,498 

3,386,435 

3, 237, 306 

2,964,607 

2, 378,181 

2,384, 407 

2,175,261 

1, 776, 572 

1,736,197 

1, 6 U 5 , bb'6 

1, 654, 673 

31,601 422 

3 217,059 

3 168, 458 

3 169, 861 

3 150, 286 

3 144, 388 

3 98,085 

3116, 918 

3 99,093 

91,010 

122, 718 

107,877 

125,669 


225, 568 

17 ; 962 

17,538 

17, 526 

17,853 

17, 911 

18,625 

18,972 

19,666 

19,272 

19,889 

20,092 

20,262 

South Dakota- 

590,924 

70', 401 

71, 758 

70,636 

65,988 

50,076 

43,725 

39,074 

33,808 

30, 557 

ys, yu& 

37, 284 

42,312 


210,000 

24,000 

23,000 

23,000 

16,000 

16,000 

15,000 

15,000 

16,000 

15,000 

16,000 

16,000 

17,000 


1,030' 691 

94 ; 786 

92 ; 518 

90,717 

87, 753 

84,998 

83,038 

81, 538 

81,658 

83,325 

80,424 

82, 288 

87,648 

TTtoh 

1,498,126 

123', 911 

IIS; 007 

144, 624 

145,711 

160,036 

130,962 

129,750 

129,065 

107,056 

103, 790 

102,469 

112,/46 


376,345 

45 ; 897 

39 ; 266 

40,070 

35,023 

31,267 

27,110 

25,088 

24,371 

24,687 

25, 325 

25,851 

32,390 

Virginia-- 

Washington_ 

West Virginia_ 

Wisconsin- 

Wyoming- 

704 

54 ' 895 

58, 914 

58,810 

67, 735 

54,664 

53, 327 

60,926 

61,255 

48,858 

60,095 

49,521 

50, 704 

2,143, 692 
1, 487, 459 
6,880,195 
203, 972 

280, 079 
104,216 
857, 675 
21,855 

253 ; 932 
108,325 
755, 745 
23, 693 

224, 444 
115,048 
806,138 
24,066 

197,389 
125,987 
698, 572 
23,185 

169, 620 
126, 659 
534, 570 
16,610 

151,491 
118, 601 
470,091 
13, 816 

136,175 
111,716 
457,895 
12,822 

129,235 
118, 908 
424, 924 
13,019 

128,854 
127,014 
405,864 
12,624 

132,663 
132,994 
450,950 
13,059 

155,386 
141, 744 
460,470 
13,696 

184,424 
156,247 
657,301 
15,527 


1 Partly estimated; does not represent sum of State figures, because in 4 
States payments for medical care, hospitalization, and/or burial have been 
excluded and an estimated amount of payments to cases aided by local offi¬ 
cials in Rhode Island has been included. j , 

5 State relief administration discontinued operations June 30,1941; data for 
subsequent months represent county indigent aid only. 


s Includes payments for medical care, hospitalization, and/or burial. 

< Represents approximately 70 percent of total expenditures; excludes 
assistance in kind and, for a fevz counties, cash payments. 


® Estimated. , . ^ ^ , 

» State program only; excludes program administered by local officials. 




































































20 


nine-tenths and instructed agencies to determine 
uniform proportions locally. In certain States 
which have inadequate funds payments are scaled 
down, but not according to a uniform plan. 
Sometimes payments are limited either by re¬ 
striction of the requirements which may be met- 
or by maximums on amounts which may be given 
to meet specific requirements. In general, the 
more nearly adequate financing of old-age assist¬ 
ance and aid to the blind has tended to promote 
more ample standards for determining need and 
amount of assistance in these programs than in 
aid to dependent children; standards for general 
relief often are still lower. 

Administrative and fiscal considerations, policies 
and standards for determining need and amount 
of assistance (including limits on payments), and 
variations among States and localities in cost of 


living have combined to produce the variations 
observed in average payments to recipients of 
public assistance (table 13). In order to afford 
greater uniformity in levels of payments for the 
three special types of public assistance, the Social 
Security Board has recommended to Congress 
variable grants to States related to their respective 
fiscal capacities. To raise the level of assist¬ 
ance payments for aid to dependent children, 
the Board has further recommended increase in the 
maximum payments provided m the Federal act 
for such aid. In comparison with other types of 
assistance. State and local provisions for general 
relief have always been inadequate. To lessen 
the disparity in assistance between general relief 
and other public aid programs, Federal participa¬ 
tion in the general relief program has also been 
recommended b}^ the Board, 


1 


21 


Trends in Financing Public Aid, 1930 - 41 * 


During 1941 increasing employment in war 
production industries greatly reduced the burden 
on the Federal, State, and local governments for 
financing public aid. Expenditures for public 
aid 1 dropped from a peak of $2.8 billion in 1938 
to $1.9 billion in 1941, the smallest amount expend¬ 
ed since 1935 but roughly 20 times the bill in 1930 
(table 19 and chart 5). The history of relief financ¬ 
ing since 1930 can be divided into four periods; 

1. From 1930 through 1932 the rapidly increas¬ 
ing bill for public aid was paid almost entirely 
from State and local resources, which proved 
insufficient to meet the widespread need in the 
deepening depression. The Federal Government 
recognized the inability of the States and localities 
to finance relief programs and first extended 
financial support for public aid in 1932. 

2. During the next 4 years, 1933-36, expansion 
in total expenditures resulted in a marked redis¬ 
tribution of relief costs among the Federal, State, 
and local governments. Financing of public aid, 
formerly almost exclusively a local responsibility, 
was assumed primarily by the Federal and State 
Governments. 

3. In 1937, when improved economic conditions 
permitted a reduction in total expenditures, there 
was some shift from Federal to State-local 
responsibility. 

4. As expenditures reached their peak in 1938 
and declined thereafter, the States and localities 
assumed increasing proportions of the total bill 
for these public aid programs while the Federal 
share dropped to that of 1933, the firstyear of large- 
scale Federal participation in relief programs. 

Federal Financial Responsibility 

The Federal Government assumed no financial 
responsibility for public aid until 1932. The 
period after 1932 was characterized by a marked 


•Prepared in the Division of Operating Statistics and Analysis. 

1 Includes old-age assistance, aid to dependent children, aid to the blind, 
general relief, subsistence grants of the Farm Security Administration, pro¬ 
grams of the Work Projects Administration (formerly the Works Progress 
Administration), and other Federal agency projects financed from emergency 
funds. Excludes programs of the Civilian Conservation Corps, National 
Youth Administration, and Public Works Administration, and regular 
Federal construction projects. For 1933-37, also includes the transient and 
emergency education programs of the Federal Emergency Relief Adminis¬ 
tration and the Civil Works Program but excludes the program for college 
student aid of the FERA. Excludes administrative expenditures. 


increase through 1936 in the proportion of total 
costs paid from Federal funds, and a decline there¬ 
after. The amount of Federal expenditures, how¬ 
ever, reached its peak in 1938 and decreased dur¬ 
ing 1939-41 as the need for public aid lessened 
(table 20). 

In 1932 the Federal Government assumed lim¬ 
ited responsibility by making loans to States and 
municipalities for relief thi’ough the Reconstruc¬ 
tion Finance Corporation and continued to make 
such loans in 1933. From 1933—36 the Federal 
Government entered the financing of public aid on 
a large scale. Federal Emergency Relief Admin¬ 
istration grants for general relief were made to 
the States during 1933-35, and Federal expendi¬ 
tures for the Civil Works Program provided em¬ 
ployment during the winter of 1933-34. The 
special programs of the FERA, also established 
in this period, continued to provide public aid 
until early in 1937. The subsistence grants of the 
Farm Security Administration (formerly the Re¬ 
settlement Administration) and the work program 
of the Works Progress Administration were initi¬ 
ated in 1935; other Federal agency projects 


Table 19 .—Public expenditures for assistance and work 
program earnings in the continental United States, 
by source of funds, calendar years 1930—41 * 


Year 

Amount (in thousands) 

Percentage distribution 

Total 

Federal 

funds 

State 

funds 

Local 

funds 

Total 

Fed¬ 

eral 

funds 

State 

funds 

Local 

funds 

1930. 

$98,024 


$8,572 

$89,452 

100.0 


8.7 

91.3 

1931.. 

217'. 043 


39 ; 061 

in', 982 

100.0 


18.0 

82.0 

1932.... 

421,370 

$73,523 

92', 315 

255 ', 532 

100.0 

17.5 

21.9 

60.6 

1933.-. 

1,059,657 

677,091 

122,530 

260.036 

100.0 

63.9 

11.7 

24.4 

1934_ 

1,779,313 

1,348,572 

176,433 

254,308 

100.0 

75.8 

10.0 

14.2 

1935_ 

1,871,315 

1, 372,389 

242,974 

255,952 

100.0 

73.3 

13.1 

13.6 

1936_ 

2,505,303 

1,938, 550 

336,239 

230,514 

100.0 

77.4 

13.4 

9.2 

1937..— 

2,173,580 

1,543.895 

396,073 

233,612 

100.0 

71.0 

18.2 

10.8 

1938.. 

2,827,300 

2,060,300 

495,582 

271,418 

100.0 

72.9 

17.5 

9.6 

1939_ 

2,638,869 

1,831,466 

531,430 

275,973 

100.0 

69.4 

20.1 

10.5 

1940.. 

2,309,068 

1,582,536 

478,635 

247,897 

100.0 

68.6 

20.7 

10.7 

1941.. 

1,950,269 

1,297,685 

439,904 

212,680 

100.0 

66.5 

22.6 

10.9 


• Amounts differ from annual totals based on monthly series, tables 1, 2, 
and 5, pp. 1,2,4, and tables 15-18, pp. 16-19. Data for 1930-35 partly estimated. 
Figures exclude administrative expenditures; include expenditures for old- 
age assistance, aid to dependent children, aid to the blind, general relief, the 
Work Projects Administration, the Civil Works Program, transient and 
emergency education programs of the Federal Emergency Relief Adminis¬ 
tration, Farm Security Administration grants, and other Federal agency 
projects financed from emergency funds; excludes expenditures for Federal 
programs of the Civilian Conservation Corps, the National Youth Admin¬ 
istration, the Public Works Administration, the program for college student 
aid of the FERA, and other regular Federal construction projects. For def¬ 
initions of terms see 1940 Yearbook, pp. 309-311; Public Assistance, 1940 (pre¬ 
printed from 1940 Yearbook), pp. 39-4l; or Social Security Bulletin, Vol. 4, 
No. 9 (September 1941), pp. 50-52. 































22 


financed from emergency funds began in 1933; all 
these programs are still in operation. In 1936 the 
Federal Government made the first grants to the 
States for the special types of public assistance 
under the Social Security Act; since then no 
major programs have been established by the 
Federal Government. 

Federal funds represented only a negligible por¬ 
tion of the rapidly mounting expenditures for 
public aid in 1930-32. RFC loans, the first of 


which were made in 1932, paid only 17 percent of 
all public aid and amounted to only $74 million, 
all of which was spent for general relief (table 19). 

From 1933 to 1936 the amount of Federal par¬ 
ticipation increased threefold as total expendi¬ 
tures for public aid more than doubled. The 
Federal share rose from less than two-thirds to 
more than three-fourths of all public aid and 
reached $1.9 billion in 1936. From 1933-35 Fed¬ 
eral aid was extended primarily through FERA 


Chart 5 .—Public expenditures for assistance and work program earnings in the continental United States, by source 

of funds,^ calendar years 1930-41 



1930 1931 


1933 1934 


1935 


1936 1937 1938 1939 


1940 1941 


* Percentage distribution by source of funds indicated in each bar. 



































































































23 


Table 20 .—Expenditures from Federal funds for assist¬ 
ance and work program earnings in the continental 
United States, by program, calendar years 1930-41 ^ 


Year 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to de¬ 
pendent 
children 

Aid to the 
blind 

General 

relief 

Federal 
work and 
assistance 
programs’ 


Amount (in thousands) 

1930 . 







1931_ 







1932 

$73,523 




$73, 523 


1933 _ 

677,091 




456,385 

$220,706 

1934 

1,348, 572 

3 $78 



792,140 

556,354 

1 

1,372,389 




989, 746 

382,643 

1936_ 

1,938, 550 

66,407 

$6.391 

$2,752 

12, 538 

1,850,462 

1937- .... 

1, 543,895 

150,006 

17,190 

4,975 

532 

1,371,192 

1938. 

2.060,300 

188,941 

25,400 

4,746 

5 

1,841,208 

1939. _ 

1,831,466 

208,005 

29,348 

5,377 

(‘) 

1, 588,736 

1940_ 

1, 582, 536 

234,881 

52,110 

6,259 


1,289,286 

1941_ 

1,297,685 

268,377 

60,357 

6,698 


962,253 


Percentage distribution 

1930_ 







1931 







1932 

100.0 




100.0 


lQ2?t 

100.0 




67.4 

32.6 

1934 

100.0 

(') 



58. 7 

41.3 


100.0 



72.1 

27.9 

1936_ 

100.0 

3.4 

0.3 

0.1 

.7 

95.5 

1937_ 

100.0 

9.7 

1.1 

.3 

. 1 

88.8 

1938_ 

100.0 

9.2 

1.2 

.2 

(3) 

89.4 

1939 _ 

100.0 

11.4 

1.6 

.3 

(») 

86.7 

iQ4n 

100.0 

14 8 

3.3 

.4 


81. 5 

1941_ 

100.0 

20.7 

4.6 

.5 


74.2 


I See footnote 1, table 19. 

» Data for 1933-40 based on Whiting, Theodore E., and Woofter, T. J., Jr., 
Summary of Relief and Federal Work Program Statistics, 19SS-40, Work Proj¬ 
ects Administration, Divisions of Statistics and Research, 1941, pp. 50-53. 

> From Federal Emergency Relief Administration funds. 

* Less than $500. 

5 Less than 0.05 percent. 


grants for general relief. At the end of 1935, 
however, with the establishment of special types 
of public assistance under the Social Security Act 
and Federal work programs, the Federal Govern¬ 
ment withdrew financial support from general 
relief; the Federal work programs represented al¬ 
most all Federal expenditures for public aid in 1936. 

The first decrease in Federal participation 
occurred in 1937, when improved economic condi¬ 
tions permitted a cut in total expenditures. 
Federal expenditures represented a slightly smaller 
proportion of total costs and were reduced by 20 
percent from $1.9 to $1.5 billion. In 1937 Federal 
funds continued to be used almost entirely for the 
Federal work programs; the portion expended for 
the special types of public assistance, however, 
increased to nearly one-eighth from a negligible 
portion in the previous year. 

From an all-time peak in 1938 Federal expendi¬ 
tures were cut more than one-third as total need 
declined sharply from 1938 to 1941. By 1941 the 
Federal Government’s share of the total cost of 
public aid had returned almost to the 1933 level 
about two-thirds of the total—and the amount 


was down to $1.3 billion, the smallest sum since 
1933. During the same period increasing propor¬ 
tions of Federal funds were expended for the special 
types of public assistance, while the work and 
assistance programs declined from almost 90 per¬ 
cent to less than three-fourths of the Federal total. 
In 1941 the programs financed entirely from 
Federal funds represented a smaller part of Federal 
expenditures than in any other year since 1935. 

State and Local Financial Responsibility 

Although the Federal Government assumed the 
largest part of the burden after 1932, the States 
and localities increased their expenditures for 
public aid more than eightfold during the period 
from 1930-39; since 1939 increasing employment 
has permitted reductions in State-local as well as 
in Federal expenditures. From 1930 through 
1935, the localities paid the larger part of State- 
local costs. Since 1935, however. State expendi¬ 
tures have exceeded those of localities. Thus the 
relative responsibility of the States as compared 
with the localities has been completely reversed 
since 1930, primarily because of the limited 
financial resources of local governments (table 21 
and chart 6). In addition, the States were 
encouraged to increase their financial responsibility 
for general relief under the FERA from 1933-35 
and for the special types of public assistance under 
the Social Security Act, beginning with 1936. 

State financial responsibility .—The States in¬ 
creased their expenditures tenfold from 1930-32 as 
rapidly mounting need exceeded limited local 
resources. State participation increased from less 
than one-tenth to more than one-fifth of ail public 


Table 21 .—Expenditures from State and local funds for 
assistance in the continental United States, calendar 
years 1930-41 ^ 


Year 

Amount (in thousands) 

Percentage distribution 

Total 

State 

funds 

Local 

funds 

Total 

state 

funds 

Local 

funds 

1930_ 

$98,024 

$8,572 

$89,452 

100.0 

8.7 

91.3 

1931 _ 

217,043 

39,061 

177,982 

100.0 

18.0 

82.0 

1932_ 

347,847 

92,315 

255, 532 

100.0 

26.5 

73.5 

1933... 

382,566 

122,530 

260,036 

100.0 

32.0 

68.0 

1934. 

430,741 

176,433 

254,308 

100.0 

41.0 

59.0 

1935_ 

498,926 

242,974 

255,952 

100.0 

48.7 

51.3 

1936.- 

566, 753 

336,239 

230,514 

100.0 

59.3 

40.7 

1937_ 

629,685 

396,073 

233,612 

100.0 

62.9 

37.1 

1938- . 

767.000 

495,582 

271,418 

100.0 

64.6 

35.4 

1939_ 

807,403 

531,430 

275,973 

100.0 

65.8 

34.2 

1940 _ 

726, 532 

478,635 

247.897 

100.0 

65.9 

34.1 

1941 

652, 584 

439,904 

212,680 

100.0 

67.4 

32.6 


I Includes expenditures for old-age assistance, aid to dependent children, 
aid to the blind, and general relief. Excludes administrative expenditures. 
Data for 1930-35 partly estimated. 
























































































24 


aid as State expenditures expanded from $9 million 
to $92 million (table 19). Most of this increase 
was expended for general relief, which represented 
more than three-fourths of State relief expenditures 
in 1935 (table 22). 

From 1933 through 1936 the amounts financed 
from State funds were considerably larger than 
in the previous period but represented a smaller 
proportion of total relief expenditures. State 
costs dropped to one-eighth of the total in 1933 
and remained at rouglily this level throughout 
the following 3 years. In amount, however. State 
expenditures increased almost three times; the 
largest part was spent for general relief. Ex¬ 


penditures for the special types of public assistance 
ulcreased in importance during 1935 and 1936 in 
anticipation of Federal grants under the Social 
Security Act, and general relief decreased from 
more than four-fifths of total State expenditures for 
assistance in 1934 to less than three-fourths in 1936. 

Despite the decrease in total expenditures for 
public aid in 1937, State costs continued to in¬ 
crease and represented almost one-fifth of the 
total costs of public aid in that year. The 
States financed a higher proportion of the bill for 
public aid in 1937 than in any other year since 
1932 and spent almost three-fifths of their funds 
for general relief. 


Chart 6 .—Expenditures from State and local funds^ for assistance in the continental Lnited States, calendar years 

1930-41 


MILLIONS OF DOLLARS 
900 


800 


700 


600 


500 


400 


300 


200 


100 







•AVvW 









- 






d667o( 



165%P 












- 

1 

|35%i 

- 

1^4% 



MILLIONS OF DOLLARS 
900 


800 


700 


- 600 


- 500 


- 400 


- 300 


- 200 


100 


1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 »937 1938 1939 1940 1941 

> Percentage distribution by State and local funds indicated in each bar. 

















































































Table 22 .—Expenditures from State funds for assistance 
in the continental United States, by program, calen¬ 
dar years 1930-41 ' 


Year 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to 
dependent 
children 

Aid to 
the 
blind 

General 

relief 


Amount (in thousands) 

1930_ 

$8,572 

$869 

$4, 899 

$2,580 

$224 

1931_ 

39,061 

7,695 

4,915 

2,667 

23,784 

1932_ 

92,315 

11,506 

7,256 

2,905 

70, 648 

1933_ 

122, 530 

11,990 

7,042 

3,028 

100,470 

1934_ 

176, 433 

16,092 

7,121 

3,508 

149,712 

1935_ 

242,974 

45,617 

7,342 

4,342 

185,673 

1936___ 

336, 239 

69,948 

12,979 

6,778 

246, 534 

1937_ 

396,073 

129,658 

26, 762 

8,134 

231,519 

1938_ 

495, 582 

165,733 

43,418 

10,615 

275,816 

1939...__ 

531,430 

181,659 

53,069 

11,501 

285,201 

1940_ 

478,635 

190,241 

50,191 

11, 592 

226,611 

1941___ 

439,904 

221,058 

61.258 

12,220 

145,368 


Percentage distribution 

1930_ 

100.0 

10.1 

57.2 

30.1 

2.6 

1931_ 

100.0 

19.7 

12.6 

6.8 

60.9 

1932_ 

100.0 

12.5 

7.9 

3.1 

76.5 

1933_ 

100.0 

9.8 

5.7 

2.5 

82.0 

1934_ 

100.0 

9.1 

4.0 

2.0 

84.9 

1935..__ 

100.0 

18.8 

3.0 

1.8 

76.4 

1936_ 

100.0 

20.8 

3.9 

2.0 

73.3 

1937_ 

100.0 

32.7 

6.8 

2.0 

58.5 

1938__ 

100.0 

33.4 

8.8 

2.1 

55.7 

1939_ 

100.0 

34.2 

10.0 

2.1 

53.7 

1940_ 

100.0 

39.7 

10.5 

2.4 

47.4 

1941 

100.0 

50.3 

13.9 

2.8 

33.0 


1 See footnote 1, table 21. 


A larger part of total relief expenditures was 
paid from State funds each year from 1938 
through 1941; in absolute amount, however, State 
expenditures reached their high point in 1939 and 
decreased thereafter. During this period State 
funds were shifted from general relief to the 
special types of public assistance, which repre¬ 
sented two-thirds of the total State cost by 1941. 

Local financial responsibility .—The responsi¬ 
bility assumed by the localities declined from 
more than 90 percent of public aid in 1930 to 
three-fifths of the total in 1932 (table 19). This 
decrease occurred despite the fact that local 
expenditures increased threefold from $89 to $256 
million. The localities, like the States, used most 
of their funds for general relief, which by 1932 repre¬ 
sented almost four-fifths of local costs (table 23). 

From 1933 to 1936, as Federal and State 
responsibility increased, local funds continued 
to play a declining role in total expenditures. 
The local share fell to less than one-fourth of the 
total in 1933 and continued to decline in the next 
3 years to less than one-tenth in 1936. The 
localities were able to decrease their expenditures 


25 

during this period and spent only $231 million in 
1936 as compared to $260 million in 1933. Gen¬ 
eral relief, which continued to take the larger 
part of local funds, accounted for four-fifths of 
local expenditures for public aid in 1933 and 
thereafter declined steadily to three-fifths in 1941. 

Expenditures by the localities were slightly 
larger in 1937 than in the previous year despite 
improved economic conditions. The increase was 
expended entirely for the special types of public 
assistance, which rose slightly in importance in 
local expenditures while general relief declined. 

The proportion of total aid borne by the local¬ 
ities did not change significantly during 1938-41 
although the local amounts decreased from their 
all-time peak in 1939 to an amount in 1941 which 
was smaller than that for any year since 1931. In 
this period of rapidly decreasing expenditures for 
public aid, local funds remained at about one- 
tenth of total costs but had decreased more than 
20 percent by 1941. The localities still were 
expending more than half of their funds for general 
relief, but expenditures for the special types of 
public assistance expanded to 40 percent of local 
funds for public aid in the last year of the period. 


Table 23 .—Expenditures from local funds for assistance 
in the continental United States, by program, calen¬ 
dar years 1930-41 ' 


Year 

Total 

Old-age 

assist¬ 

ance 

Aid to 
dependent 
children 

Aid to 
the 
blind 

General 

relief 


.\mount (in thousands) 

1930 

$89,452 

$1,183 

$28,912 

$2,881 

$56,476 

1931_ 

177,982 

8,471 

28,963 

3,032 

137, 516 

1932_ 

255, 532 

13,491 

35,424 

3,297 

203, 320 

1933_ 

260,036 

13,865 

33, 560 

3,395 

209,216 

1934_ 

254,308 

16,087 

33,661 

3, 516 

201,044 

1935___ 

255,952 

19, 297 

34, 491 

3,675 

198,489 

1936__-. 

230, 514 

18,884 

30,284 

3,284 

178,062 

1937_ 

233, 612 

29, 536 

26, 345 

3,061 

174.670 

1938_ 

271,418 

39, 556 

28,494 

3,583 

199, 785 

1939_ 

275,973 

43, 255 

32, 501 

3,887 

196, 330 

1940..— - 

247,897 

46,905 

30, 757 

3,874 

166, 361 

1941_ 

212,680 

49,825 

31,132 

3,925 

127, 798 



Percentage distribution 

1930_ 

100.0 

1.3 

32.3 

3.2 

63.2 

1931_ 

100.0 

4.7 

16.3 

1.7 

77.3 

1932.... 

100.0 

5.3 

13.8 

1.3 

79.6 

1933___ 

100.0 

5.3 

12.9 

1.3 

80.5 

1934..... 

100.0 

6.3 

13.2 

1.4 

79.1 

1935___ 

100.0 

7.5 

13.5 

1.4 

77.6 

1936___ 

100.0 

8.2 

13.1 

1.4 

77.3 

1937_ 

100.0 

12.6 

11.3 

1.3 

74.8 

1938_ 

100.0 

14.6 

10.5 

1.3 

73.6 

1939_ 

100.0 

15.7 

11.8 

1.4 

71.1 

1940_ 

100.0 

18.9 

12.4 

1.6 

67.1 

1941 

100.0 

23.4 

14.6 

1.9 

60.1 


> See footnote 1, table 21. 





























































































26 


Financing Individual Programs 

Old-Age Assistance 

Prior to 1936, when the Social Security Act 
became effective, old-age assistance was financed 
entirely from State and local funds. From 1930 
to 1934, expenditures for old-age assistance in¬ 
creased from $2 million to $32 million, primarily 
because of the establishment of programs by addi¬ 
tional States. During this period the localities 
bore somewhat more than half the cost (table 24). 

In 1935 several States established old-age 
assistance programs financed entirely from State 
funds in anticipation of receipt of Federal grants 
under the Social Security Act. As a result, more 
than two-thirds of old-age assistance costs were 
paid from State funds in 1935. 

When the Federal Government assumed its 
share of old-age assistance costs in 1936, State 
participation rose to 79 percent of the non-Federal 
share and increased slightly from that date to 
1941, when it reached 82 percent. The large in¬ 
crease in State participation in 1935 and 1936 may 
be explained in part by the requirement that the 
States contribute to the financing of programs 
under the Social Security Act. The continued 


Table 24 .—Public expenditures^ for old-age assistance 
in the continental United States, by source of funds, 
calendar years 1930—41 


Year 

Amount (in thousands) 

Percentage distribution 

Total 

Federal 

funds 

State 

funds 

Local 

funds 

Total 

Fed¬ 

eral 

funds 

State 

funds 

Local 

funds 

1930_ 

$2,052 


$869 

$1,183 

100.0 


42.3 

f>7 7 

1931_ 

16; 166 


7,695 

8 , 471 

100.0 


47.6 

*19 4 

1932_ 

24,997 


11, 506 

13 ; 491 

100.0 


46.0 

M 0 

1933.. 

25,855 


11,990 

13, 865 

100.0 


46.4 


1934_ 

32,257 

«$78 

16,092 

16,087 

100.0 

2 0.2 

49.9 

49.9 

1935. 

64,914 


45,617 

19, 297 

100.0 


70 3 

9Q 7 

1936.. 

155, 239 

66,407 

69,948 

18,884 

100.0 

42.8 

45.0 

12.2 

1937_ 

309,200 

150,006 

129,658 

29, 536 

100.0 

48.5 

41.9 

9.6 

1938_ 

394, 230 

188,941 

165, 733 

39, 556 

100.0 

47.9 

42.1 

10.0 

1939. 

432,919 

208.005 

181,659 

43, 255 

100.0 

48.0 

42.0 

10.0 

1940_ 

472,027 

234,881 

190, 241 

46,905 

100.0 

49.8 

40.3 

9.9 

1941. 

539,260 

268,377 

221,058 

49,825 

100.0 

49.8 

41.0 

9.2 


> Amounts differ from annual totals based on monthly series, tables 1, 2, and 
5, pp. 1,2,4, and tables lS-18, pp. 16-19. Excludes administrative expenditures. 
For definitions of terms see 1940 Yearbook, pp. 309-311; Public Assistance, 
19i0 (preprinted from 1940 Yearbook), pp. 39-41; or Social Security Bulletin, 
Vol. 4, No. 9 (September 1941), pp. 50-52. 

’ From Federal Emergency Relief Administration funds. 

Source: Totals for 1930-35 based on State and trend data in Parker, 
Florence E., “Experience Under State Old-Age Pension Acts in 1935,” 
Monthly Labor Review, Vol. 43, No. 4 (October 1936), pp. 835-837. Distribu¬ 
tion by source of funds: for 1930-33, estimated on basis of provisions in State 
old-age assistance laws; for 1934, based on State data in Parker, Florence E., 
“Experience Under State Old-Age Pension Acts in 1934,” Monthly Labor 
Review, Vol. 41, No. 2 (August 1935), p. 315; for 1935, from “Financing Old-Age 
Assistance in the United States Prior to the Federal Social Security Act,” 
Monthly Labor Review, Vol. 43, No. 4 (October 1936), p. 861. 


increase in State participation reflects the tendency 
of the States to relieve the localities of some or all 
financial responsibility for this progi-am. 

The amounts made available by the States for 
old-age assistance increased from $1 million to 
$16 million from 1930 to 1934. In anticipation of 
Federal funds. State expenditures jumped to $46 
million in 1935 and mounted rapidly under the 
Social Security Act to $221 million in 1941. The 
local share, which had exceeded one-half until 1934, 
decreased to less than one-third in 1935 and has 
been fluctuating around one-fifth of State-local costs 
for this program under the Social Security Act. 
In absolute amounts, however, local expenditures 
increased from $19 million in 1935 to almost $50 
million in 1941. 

The Federal share of old-age assistance rose 
steadily from 43 percent in the first year of 
Federal grants-in-aid to almost 50 percent in 1941. 
This increase reflects chiefly the extension of 
Federal funds to additional States. 

Aid to Dependent Children 

Prior to the Social Security Act, aid to de¬ 
pendent children, in contrast to old-age assistance, 
was primarily a locally financed program. Ex¬ 
penditures for aid to dependent children ran from 
$34 million to $42 million, of which the localities 
contributed more than four-fifths (table 25). 


Table 25 .—Public expenditures^ for aid to dependent 
children in the continental United States, by source 
of funds, calendar years 1930—41 


Year 

Amount (in thousands) 

Percentage distribution 

Total 

Federal 

funds 

State 

funds 

Local 

funds 

Total 

Fed¬ 

eral 

funds 

State 

funds 

Local 

funds 

1930_ 

$33,811 


$4,899 

$28,912 

100.0 


14 ^ 

85 5 

1931_ 

33,878 


4,915 

28; 963 

100.0 


14 5 

85 5 

1932_ 

42, 680 


7,256 

35 ; 424 

100 0 


17 0 

QQ A 

1933. 

40,602 


7,042 

33, 560 

10QJ3 


17 3 


1934_ 

40,782 


7,121 

33,661 

100 . n 


17 

82 5 

1935_ 

41,833 


7,342 

34,491 

100 0 


17 6 


1936. 

49,654 

$6,391 

12,979 

30, 284 

100.0 

12.9 

26.1 

61.0 

1937_ 

70,297 

17,190 

26,762 

26,345 

100.0 

24.4 

38.1 

37.5 

1938_ 

97,312 

25,400 

43,418 

28,494 

100.0 

26.1 

44.6 

29.3 

1939.. 

114,918 

29,348 

53,069 

32, 501 

100.0 

25.5 

46.2 

28.3 

1940_ 

133,058 

52,110 

50,191 

30, 757 

100.0 

39.2 

37.7 

23.1 

1941.. 

152,747 

60.357 

61,258 

31,132 

100.0 

39.5 

40.2 

20.3 


‘ See footnote 1, table 24. 

Source: Totals for 1930-31 estimated primarily on basis of data for urban 
areas and on U. S. Children’s Bureau, Mothers’ Aid, 1931, Publication No. 
^0, pp. 28-29; totals for 1932-35 obtained primarily from Bucklin, Dorothy 
R., “Public Aid for Care of Dependent Children,” Social Security Bulletin, 
Vol. 2, No. 4 (April 1939), p. 30, table 5; distribution by source of funds based 
on Federal Emergency Relief Administration, “Digest of State and Terri¬ 
torial Laws Granting Aid to Dependent Children in Their Own Homes ” 
Monthly Report, September 1935, p. 48, and U. S. Children’s Bureau, op. cit, 
p. 16. Primary sources for all years supplemented by data published in 
State annual reports and special publications. 


1 












































































27 


Under the Social Security Act this prog^ram 
became predominantly State-financed. The State 
share increased from less than one-fifth of State- 
local costs in 1935 to nearly a third in 1936. 
Further large increases in State participation were 
registered in 1937 and 1938, and smaller increases 
thereafter. By 1941 two-thirds of the non- 
Federal cost of aid to dependent children was paid 
from State funds. 

In absolute amounts, State expenditures for 
aid to dependent children almost doubled in the 
first year under the Social Security Act and by 
1941 had increased to $61 million as compared 
with $5 million in 1930. 

Conversely, the share borne by the localities 
declined from 86 percent in 1930 to 34 percent of 
State-local costs in 1941, when local expenditures 
for the program were only $2 million above 1930. 
The amounts expended by the localities since the 
passage of the Social Security Act have never 
reached the amounts spent in the years immedi¬ 
ately preceding 1936, 

The Federal Government has always assumed a 
smaller proportion of costs of aid to dependent 
children than of old-age assistance. In 1936, 
only 13 percent of the amount for aid to dependent 
children was met from Federal funds. As addi¬ 
tional States came under the Social Security Act, 
this proportion rose to about 25 percent in 1937-39. 
When the Federal Government increased its 
matching ratio from one-third to one-half as of 
January 1940, the share paid from Federal funds 
rose to almost 40 percent. Two major factors 
have operated to keep the Federal share well be¬ 
low the matching ratio. Several States have not 
qualified for Federal grants for aid to dependent 
children under the Social Security Act. In partic¬ 
ipating States, moreover, many individual pay¬ 
ments were made toward which the Federal Gov¬ 
ernment contributed less than half because of the 


Act expenditures increased to $13 million, and rose 
steadily thereafter to $23 million in 1941 (table 26). 

State funds met less than half the cost until 
1935, when they represented 54 percent of the 
total. Under the Social Security Act, the States 
increased their contribution to the non-Federal 
share from two-thirds in 1936 to three-fourths in 
1941. State expenditures ran between $3 million 
and $4 million annually before the Social Security 
Act; thereafter they increased rapidly and reached 
$12 million in 1941. 


Table 26 .—Public expenditures^ for aid to the blind in 
the continental United States, by source of funds, 
calendar years 1930-41 


Year 


1930. 

1931. 

1932. 

1933. 

1934. 

1935. 

193G. 

1937. 

1938. 

1939. 

1940. 

1941. 


Amount (in thousands) 


Total 


$5,461 
5,699 
6,202 
6,423 
7,024 
8,017 

12,814 
16,170 
18,944 
20,765 
21,725 
22,843 


Federal 

funds 


$2,752 
4,975 
4,746 
5,377 
6,259 
6,698 


State 

funds 


$2,580 
2,667 
2,905 
3,028 
3,508 
4,342 

6,778 
8,134 
10,615 
11,501 
11,592 
12,220 


Local 

funds 


$2,881 
3,032 
3,297 
3,395 
3,516 
3,675 

3,284 
3,061 
3,583 
3,887 
3,874 
3,925 


Percentage distribution 


Total 

Fed¬ 

eral 

funds 

State 

funds 

Local 

funds 

100.0 


47.2 

52.8 

100.0 


46.8 

53.2 

100.0 


46.8 

53.2 

100.0 


47.2 

52.8 

100.0 


49.9 

50.1 

100.0 


54.2 

45.8 

100.0 

21.5 

52.9 

25.6 

100.0 

30.8 

50.3 

18.9 

100.0 

25.1 

56.0 

18.9 

100.0 

25.9 

55.4 

18.7 

100.0 

28.8 

53.4 

17.8 

100.0 

29.3 

53.5 

17.2 


‘ See footnote 1, table 24. 

Source: Totals for 1930-33 estimated primarily on basis of data for urban 
areas; distribution by source of funds for these years estimated on basis of 
provisions of State laws. Data for 1934 based on “Public Provision for Pen¬ 
sions for the Blind in 1934,” Monthly Labor Review, Vol. 41, No. 3 (September 
1935), p. 592; for 1935, “Public Pensions for the Blind in 1935,” Monthly Labor 
Review, Vol. 43, No. 2 (August 1936), p. 315. Primary sources for all years 
supplemented by data published in State annual reports and special pub¬ 
lications. 


There was a corresponding decline in local ex¬ 
penditures, which were more than half the total 
in 1930 and less than one-fourth the non-Federal 
share in 1941. The level of local expenditures 
under the Social Security Act has been somewhat 
higher than in the period prior to 1936, and in the 
last few years has totaled almost $4 million annu- 


provisions governing the maximum amounts 
matchable by Federal funds. 

Aid to the Blind 

The histoiy of financing aid to the blind closely 
parallels that of old-age assistance, but the increase 
in the State share of State-local costs has been 
more gradual and not as great as for old-age assist¬ 
ance. Total expenditures for aid to the blind 
increased from $5 million in 1930 to $8 million in 
1935. In the first year under the Social Security 


ally. 

The Federal share of aid to the blind has fluc¬ 
tuated between a low of 22 percent and a high of 
31 percent. The comparatively small proportion 
of total costs paid by the Federal Government for 
this program, for which Federal grants represent 
approximately half the amounts expended under 
approved State plans, is explained by the fact that 
two of the States with the largest programs for aid 
to the blind do not participate in programs under 
the Social Security Act. 








































28 


General Relief 

The cost of general relief rose rapidly from $57 
million in 1930 to almost $1.4 billion in 1935, re¬ 
flecting the prolonged effects of the depression. 
During this period Federal responsibility, which 
was nonexistent prior to 1932, was expanded to 
meet almost three-fourths of the cost in 1935, the 
last year of Federal grants under the FEKA. In 


Table 27 .—Public expenditures^ for general relief in the 
continental United States, by source of funds, calen¬ 
dar years 1930-41 



Amount (in thousands) 

Percentage distribution 

Year 

Total 

Federal 

State 

Local 

Total 

Fed¬ 

eral 

funds 

State 

Local 


funds 

funds 

funds 

funds 

funds 

1930... 

$56,700 


$224 

$56,476 
137, 516 
203,320 

100.0 


0.4 

99.6 

1931... 

161,300 


23,784 
70,648 

100.0 


14.7 

85.3 

1932... 

347,491 
766,071 

$73, 523 

100.0 

21.2 

20.3 

58.5 

1933... 

456,385 

100,470 

209,216 

100.0 

59.6 

13.1 

27.3 

1934... 

1,142,896 

792,140 

149,712 

201,044 

100.0 

69.3 

13.1 

17.6 

1935... 

1,373,908 

989, 746 

185, 673 

198,489 

100.0 

72.0 

13.5 

14.5 

1936... 

437,134 

12,538 

246, 534 
231,519 

178,062 

100.0 

2.9 

56.4 

40.7 

1937... 

406,721 

532 

174,670 

100.0 

.1 

56.9 

43.0 

1938... 

475,606 

5 

275,816 

199,785 

100.0 

e) 

58.0 

42.0 

1939... 

481,531 
392,972 
273,166 

(») 

285,201 

196,330 

100.0 

(?) 

59.2 

40.8 

1940 .. 


226,611 
145,368 

166,361 
127,798 

100.0 


57.7 

42.3 

1941... 


100.0 


53.2 

46.8 




' See footnote 1, table 24. 

’ Less than 0.05 percent. 

3 Less than $500. 

Source: Totals for 1930-31 based on Cone, Frederick M., Monthly Income 
Payments in the United States, 1929-iO, U. S. Department of Commerce, 
Bureau of Foreign and Domestic Commerce, Economic Series No. 6, 1940, 
pp. 22-23; for 1932-36, on Whiting, Theodore E., and Woofter, T. J., Jr., 
Summary of Relief and Federal Work Program Statistics, 19SS-iO, Work Proj¬ 
ects Administration, Divisions of Statistics and Research, 1941, pp. 30, 51. 
Distribution of State and local funds for 1930-32 based on Laszloecker, R. L., 
“Sources of State Emergency Relief Funds, July 1, 1930, through June 30, 
1935,” Federal Emergency Relief Administration, Monthly Report, July 
1935, pp. 61-73. Federal funds for 1932 and distribution for 1933-36, from 
WPA, Division of Statistics. 


1936-38 a negligible proportion of the costs of 
direct relief was paid by the balances of FERA 
funds, and none thereafter (table 27). 

State financial participation increased from 
practically nothing in 1930 to 48 percent of State- 
local costs m 1935. When Federal funds for 
direct relief were withdrawn. State financing 
went up to 58 percent and stayed at about this 
level through 1940. The State proportion of 
State-local costs fell to 53 percent in 1941. State 
funds reached their first peak in 1936, when they 
approximated $247 million as compared with 
$224 thousand in 1930. After decreasing in 
1937, State funds reached their all-time peak of 
$285 million in 1939 and thereafter decreased 
sharply to $145 million in 1941. 

Local expenditures, which represented almost 
100 percent of relief payments in 1930, amounted 
to slightly more than 40 percent for each of the 
years 1936 through 1940. However, the amounts 
expended by local governments for general relief 
increased from $56 million in 1930 to about $200 
million in 1935. After declining to about $175 
million in 1936 and 1937, local funds returned to 
the 1935 level and remained there until 1940. 
Sharp declines after 1939 brought local costs to 
$128 million in 1941, the smallest amount since 
1931. Because of the greater decrease in State 
expenditures for general relief in the last 2 years, 
however, the proportion of local expenditures 
increased to 47 percent. 






























29 

Eligibility for Public Assistance Under 
Approved State Plans, as of December 1941 * * 


Programs for old-age assistance, aid to dependent 
children, and aid to the blind are administered by 
States under plans approved by the Social Security 
Board pursuant to the provisions of the Social 
Security Actd Subject to the requirements in the 
act, the States determine the scope of their 
programs, which is largely measured by the con¬ 
ditions of eligibility established for each. 

Federal grants-in-aid are made available to 
States administering approved State plans.^ 
Though State plans do not yet take full advantage 
of the maximum Federal funds authorized under 
the act, legislative action in the 46 jurisdictions 
which had legislative sessions in 1941 continued to 
show a trend toward liberalization of conditions of 
eligibility.^ The effect of such legislative action 
on existing provisions is indicated in this summary 
of the eligibility provisions in approved plans for 
public assistance.^ These State plans, while based 
on legislation, include provisions established by 
administrative action pursuant to the statutory 
authority vested in the State agency responsible for 
the administration of the programs. A somewhat 
arbitrary classification of the various State eligi¬ 
bility requirements has been adopted for this 
discussion. In the actual operation of the plans, 
administrative practices are affected by the avail¬ 
ability of funds and by determinations within the 
discretion of the agency. There is also a greater 
degree of relationship among many of the condi¬ 
tions of eligibility than might appear to be the 
case, particularly in relation to need, income and 
property limitations, and the responsibility of 
applicants’ relatives for their support. 

At the end of 1941, 142 approved plans were 
in operation. All 51 jurisdictions had approved 

•Prepared in the Division of Plans and Grants. Statements in this article 
are based upon factual analysis and interpretation of data in approved State 
plans and do not necessarily reflect practices recommended by the Social 
Security Board. 

• Titles I, IV, and X. 

3 Sections 3, 403, and 1003 of the Social Security Act, as amended. 

3 Of the 51 jurisdictions (48 States, Alaska, District of Columbia, and 
Hawaii) eligible to participate in Federal grants, only Alabama, Kentucky, 
Louisiana, Mississippi, and Virginia had no legislative sessions in 1941. 

* For a summary of conditions of eligibility, by individual States, see Social 
Security Board, Characteristics of Slate Plans for Old-Age Assistance . . ..for 
Aid to the Blind . . ., and/or Aid to Dependent Children, Revised July 1,1940. 


plans for old-age assistance; 44, for aid to the 
blind;® and 47, for aid to dependent children.® 
Three States (Alaska, Kentucky, and Nevada) 
had approved plans for old-age assistance only; 
Iowa had approved plans for aged and blind only; 
4 (Delaware, Illinois, Missouri, and Pennsylvania) 
had approved plans for aged and children only; 
and the remaining 43 States had approved plans 
for all three special types of public assistance. 

During 1941, more new plans were approved by 
the Social Security Board than during any other 
year since 1937, the second year of operation of 
the Social Security Act. One new plan for aid to 
the blind (Texas) and four new plans for aid to 
dependent children (Connecticut, Illinois, Missis¬ 
sippi,^ and Texas) were approved. 

Conditions Relevant to Need 
Need as a Condition of Eligibility 

The Social Security Act provides for assistance 
to “needy” individuals,® and “need” is the only 
limiting condition of eligibility required under 
the act for each of the gi'oups for whom assistance 
is available—the aged, the blind, and dependent 
children. The term “need,” however, is not 
defined in the Federal act, and, within broad 
limitations, the decision as to what constitutes 
need is left to the States. Effective July 1, 1941, 
the 1939 amendments to the act required specifi¬ 
cally that “the State agency shall, in determining 
need, take into consideration any other income 
and resources” of an individual claiming assist¬ 
ance.® 

Need as a condition of eligibility is usually 
described in general terms in the State plans. The 
determination whether the condition of need has 
been met is based on more detailed provisions in 
the State plans relating to standards of assistance, 
including the requirements of applicants, amount 

3 All but Alaska, Delaware, Illinois, Kentucky, Missouri, Nevada, and 
Pennsylvania. 

« All but Alaska, Iowa, Kentucky, and Nevada. 

3 A Mississippi plan for aid to dependent children was approved previously 
but was inoperative after March 1936. 

8 Sections 1 and 6, 401 and 406, and 1001 and 1006. 

• Sections 2 (a) (7), 402 (a) (7), and 1002 (a) (8). 






30 


of income, personal property, real property, “or 
other resources” of an applicant, the existence of 
relatives and others who support or are able to 
support the applicant, and the amount of assist¬ 
ance that may be granted. In many States, one 
or more of these individual factors form the basis 
of separate conditions of eligibility apart from that 
of “need”; for example, in some States, the appli¬ 
cant’s ownership of property in excess of a speci¬ 
fied amount or the existence of legally liable 
relatives who are found able to support the appli¬ 
cant would of themselves disqualify the applicant. 

General Definitions of ‘‘Needy Persons’* 

A needy person is most frequently characterized 
in State plans as a person with insufficient or in¬ 
adequate income or other resources “to provide a 
reasonable subsistence compatible with decency 
and health.” This standard of need is found in 
29 of the 51 old-age assistance plans,^° in 27 of the 
44 plans for aid to the blind,and in 17 of the 47 
State plans for aid to dependent children.^^ 

A needy person is defined in other plans in a 
variety of ways, as one who is “deprived of the 
essentials of life,” “rendered permanently unable 
to provide properly for self,” “in need of relief and 
support,” “without adequate support and is un¬ 
able to support self,” or “unable to support self in 
whole or in part, having no one liable for and able 
to support, and without other means or sources of 
income by which he can be maintained.” 

The standard of need is also expressed in many 
different ways. A needy person is described, for 
example, as one whose income or resources are 
insufficient “to provide a reasonable subsistence in 
accordance with accustomed standard of living,” 
“to maintain self on reasonable standard of health 
and decency,” “to provide a reasonable standard 
of health and well-being,” “ . . . for mainte¬ 

nance in decency and health,” “to provide a rea¬ 
sonable subsistence compatible with decency, health 
and needs,” “to meet requirements necessary to 

Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, 
Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Missis¬ 
sippi, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, 
North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Vermont, West 
Virginia, and Wyoming. 

n Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, 
Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, 
Mississippi, Montana, New Hampshire, New Mexico, New York, South 
Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia, and Wyoming. 

>2 Arkansas, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Indiana, Kansas, Louisiana, 
Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire, New 
Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas, and Washington. 


maintain a standard of health and decency,” “to 
provide necessary food, clothing, fuel, and shelter 
and incidentals,” “to provide reasonable sub¬ 
sistence,” “to provide a living consistent with 
standards of decency and health,” “to provide 
the necessities of life,” or “to provide a reasonable 
subsistence compatible with health and well¬ 
being.” 

In addition to the phrases “insufficient income” 
and “insufficient income or any other resources,” 
which are used most frequently in the definitions, 
inadequacy of income and resources is variously 
described as “income inadequate, including con¬ 
tributions in money, subsistence, or services,” 
“insufficient means,” “inadequate income and 
support,” “inadequate earning capacity, income 
or resources, from whatever source derived,” 
“insufficient income from all sources,” “inadequate 
income, when added to contributions from rela¬ 
tives or others,” or “inadequate means of support.” 

In three States (Utah, Vermont, and Wyoming) 
income or resources of the spouse of an applicant 
for old-age assistance are specifically mentioned 
in the definition of need as being included in de¬ 
termining the need of the applicant. In three 
States (California, New Jersey, and Ohio) inability 
of a needy blind person to support himself must be 
due to loss or impairment of sight. In addition 
to general definitions of need appearing in some of 
the plans for aid to dependent children, a de¬ 
pendent child is usually defined in terms of being 
deprived of parental support or care. These defi¬ 
nitions are discussed subsequently. 

In 17 States,^^ the plans contain no specific 
limitations on the amount and types of income and 
property of an applicant as a condition of eligi¬ 
bility for assistance in any category. In the re¬ 
maining States there is little uniformity with 
regard to these conditions of eligibility; the provi¬ 
sions include various limitations on the amount 
and type of income, real property, or personal 
property, or combinations of such assets. 

Specific Income Limitations 

Nine States limit eligibility to persons whose 
income does not exceed a specified amount. With 
the exception of Florida, these provisions are all 
statutory and apply only to old-age assistance. 

13 Arkansas, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, 
Mississippi, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, South 
Dakota, Texas, Virginia, and West Virginia. 




31 


In Colorado the law provides that a person may be 
eligible if he has a net income of less than $45 a 
month. Alabama and Ohio set the maximum 
income at $480 a year. The Washington law speci¬ 
fies a yearly income of less than $480 and a month¬ 
ly income of less than $40. In Arizona an appli¬ 
cant is disqualified if his income exceeds $360 a 
year. In Utah an applicant may be eligible for 
assistance if his income from all sources does not 
exceed “a yearly average of $30 per month'’; if the 
applicant is married, the combined income of hus¬ 
band and wife living together is considered in 
determining the need of each. In Vermont an 
applicant may be eligible for old-age assistance if 
his own income does not exceed $360 a year or the 
joint income is not more than $500 a year. In 
South Carolina an applicant may be eligible if his 
income is less than $240 a year. The Florida plans 
for all three programs provide that liquid assets 
and income “should not usually be in excess of 
$360 a year.” This provision is not statutory. 

Real Property Limitations 

Maximum amount. —The limitations on amounts 
of real property are frequently qualified in one or 
more respects. It is necessary, therefore, to 
consider additional limitations in relation to the 
money valuations given in the tabulation: 


Maximum amount State and program i 

$5,000_ Connecticut (ABC); Rhode Island (AC); 

Minnesota and Wisconsin (A). 

3.500 _Vermont (B). 

3,000_ California, Massachusetts, and Montana 

(ABC); New Jersey and Ohio (A); New 

Hampshire (C). 

2.500 _Oklahoma (ABC); Michigan and Vermont 

(A). 

2,000_ Iowa (AB). 

1.500 _Maine (AB); Maryland (A); Missouri 

(AC). 

1,000_New Hampshire (AB). 

500_Alaska and Colorado (A). 

Other_Florida and South Carolina (ABC); Idaho, 

I Nebraska, and Tennessee (AB); Penn¬ 

sylvania (AC); Delaware, Maine, Min¬ 
nesota, Washington, and Wisconsin 
(C); North Dakota (A). 


> A means old-age assistance; B, aid to the blind; C, aid to dependent 
children. 

In Rhode Island (children), the specified maximum 
is further limited to property occupied as a resi¬ 
dence. In Massachusetts (aged), the maximum is 
further limited to equity in vacant land from which 


no income is derived, or in property in which the 
applicant resides. 

Of the 12 States with “other” maximums, 
Idaho (aged and blind) defines the maximum as a 
“reasonable amount”; the remaining States, in 
general, limit the ownership of property of an 
applicant, to qualify for assistance, to the home in 
which he is living. In Maine and Wisconsin 
(children), the applicant may be eligible in sucn 
case, if the cost of maintaining the property does 
not exceed rental costs for living quarters. 

In a few States, ownership of property in excess 
of the maximum will not disqualify an applicant if 
the sale of the property would result in a loss, if 
the property produces no income or insufficient 
income to meet the needs of the applicant, or if 
unusual circumstances exist. 

In nine States,^^ real and personal property 
are not distinguished with respect to the maximum 
assets of an applicant in determining eligibility for 
assistance. 

Ejffect oj marital status on maximum. —In five 
States the property owned by the spouse is in¬ 
cluded in determining the maximum. In Cali¬ 
fornia (blind), the applicant's share of community 
property is similarly included. In five States a 
higher maximum is prescribed if the applicant is 
married. In Colorado (aged), an applicant may 
be eligible if property owned by the spouse does 
not exceed $1,000. 

Exempt property. —In four States,property owned 
and occupied as a residence is not considered in 
determining the maximum limitation.Alaska 
(aged) exempts patents to homestead lands; and 
Pennsylvania (aged and children), property re¬ 
sources not convertible into cash. 

Assignment and transfer of property to agency .— 
Eight States include provisions for assigning or 
transferring real property to the agency as a con¬ 
dition of eligibility. In four of these States the 
maximum limitation on real property may be 
waived if the applicant conveys or transfers the 
property to the agency, to the extent and in the 

n Minnesota, New Jersey, Ohio, Ehode Island, and Vermont (aged); 
California (blind); Missouri (aged and children); Tennessee (aged and blind); 
and Montana (aged, blind, and children). 

1* California, Michigan, Minnesota, Rhode Island, and Wisconsin (aged). 

w Ohio and Vermont (aged), $4,000; Iowa (aged and blind), $3,000; New 
Hampshire (aged and blind), $2,000; and Missouri (aged), $2,000. 

” Colorado (aged), property owned by applicant or spouse; Connecticut 
and Montana (aged, blind, and children); Vermont (aged), of value up to 
$ 1 , 000 . 

1* Connecticut (aged and blind); Massachusetts, North Dakota, and Ohio 
(aged). 












32 


manner required by the agency; and in the other 
four,^® conveyance or transfer of property may be 
required as a condition to receiving assistance, 
when no maximum limitation is imposed, or re¬ 
gardless of the maximum. 

Determining the value oj property .—In prescrib¬ 
ing the maximum limitations on real property as a 
condition of eligibility, the amount is variously 
characterized as “net value,” “equity in prop¬ 
erty,” “market value,” 22“assessed valuation,” ^ 
“assessed value, less recorded liens,” “assessed 
valuation of unencumbered property,” “value 
with mortgages and encumbrances deducted,” ^ 
“county assessed valuation, less encumbrances of 
record.” 

Personal Property Limitations 

Personal property limitations other than those 
discussed earlier with regard to specific income 
limitations and those which do not distinguish be¬ 
tween personal and real property appear in 28 
State plans for old-age assistance, 17 plans for aid 
to the blind, and 16 plans for aid to dependent 
children. 

In six States, ownership of personal property up 
to $300 in value does not disqualify an applicant. 
In Wyoming (aged and blind), an applicant may 
be eligible for assistance if he owns up to $150 in 
cash; for aid to the blind, carrying charges not ex¬ 
ceeding a reasonable rental may also be allowed 
when the applicant owns his home. In Louisiana, 
provision is made in all three programs for a maxi¬ 
mum of $200 in bank accounts or postal savings. 
In four jurisdictions the maximum is $250; in the 
District of Columbia (aged and blind), an appli¬ 
cant may be eligible if he has insurance or an 
estate or bank account up to this amount, held for 
funeral expenses, but insurance in excess of this 
amount must be assigned to the agency; in Colo¬ 
rado (aged), the spouse of the applicant may also 
own personal property up to $500, and personal 
property exempt from execution or attachment is 

New York (aged and blind); Iowa, New Hampshire, and New Jersey 
(aged). 

»i> Minnesota and Ohio (aged); Vermont (blind). 

Connecticut (aged, blind, and children); Rhode Island (aged and chil¬ 
dren); Massachusetts (aged, blind, and children); New Hampshire (aged and 
blind); Oklahoma (children); Maryland, New Jersey, and Vermont (aged). 

Alaska (aged); and Oklahoma (aged and blind). 

M California (aged and children). 

“ Iowa (aged and blind). 

« Montana (aged, blind, and children). 

M Michigan (aged). 

•^California (blind). 


not considered in determining the maximums; in 
Utah (blind and children), the maximum for the 
applicant and spouse together is $500; and in 
California (children), an increased maximum of 
$500 is established for the family. 

In establishing eligibility, the maximum amount 
of personal property of an applicant is most fre¬ 
quently set at $300. This basic maximum is 
found in 16 plans in 12 States. In 6 States, the 
maximum is merely designated as $300 in cash or 
other assets.^® In 6 States, an increased maxi¬ 
mum ranging from $450 to $600 is permitted when 
the applicant is married.^® In North Dakota 
(aged), an applicant may be eligible when he or 
his spouse owns insurance with cash surrender 
value up to $300, or personal property up to $200. 
In Florida (aged, blind, and children), if an appli¬ 
cant owns $250 in insurance, liquid assets “should 
not usually” exceed $110. Three States®® have 
established a maximum of $500. In Maine 
(blind), an applicant who has up to $600 in liquid 
assets may be eligible. 

Five States in this group specifically exclude 
certain personal property in determining the maxi¬ 
mum. In three States, such items as household 
goods, wearing apparel, and personal effects are 
specifically excluded.®^ In California (aged), the 
cash surrender value of life insurance of face value 
of $1,000 is excluded if the insurance was in effect 
at least 5 years prior to application. Massachu¬ 
setts (aged) specifically excludes the amount of the 
minimum admission fee for persons on waiting 
lists of private institutions, and certain life insur¬ 
ance with face value up to $1,000 or $3,000, depend¬ 
ing on the age of the policies, or certain group 
insurance with premiums of not more than 50 
cents a week. 

In four States ®® provision is made for trans¬ 
ferring or assigning to the agency personal prop¬ 
erty in excess of the maximum, which may 
constitute a waiver of the maximum as a condition 
of eligibility. 


« Delaware and Maryland (aged); Massachusetts (blind and children); 
Minnesota and Rhode Island (children); and Vermont (aged) includes life 
insurance. 

«Iowa and Nebraska (aged and blind); Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada (if 
husband and wife are both applicants), and New Hampshire (aged). In 
Minnesota, the maximums refer to the net value of assets convertible into 
cash, but conversion may be waived if undue loss would result. 

so California (aged); Missouri (aged and children); and New Hampshire 
(blind), $750 for applicant and spouse. 

SI Michigan and North Dakota (aged); and Minnesota (aged and 
children). 

»s Iowa, Massachusetts. New Hampshire, and North Dakota (aged). 








33 


Some plans specifically provide that the prop¬ 
erty of the applicant is to be retained for funeral 
expenses. 

In six States, the maximum limitation on per¬ 
sonal property ranges from $600 to $1,000. In 
Alaska (aged), the maximum is set at $200 in cash 
and $500 in other personal property, and the 
applicant may be required to pledge property in 
excess of $200 to the agency. In Arizona (aged), 
the maximum is $1,000 in cash and other personal 
property, excluding household furniture. In Del¬ 
aware (children), an applicant, to be eligible for 
aid, may have cash not exceedmg $1,000. The 
maximums in Oklahoma apply to all three cate¬ 
gories; $250 in resources and $500 cash or loan 
value of insurance, increased to $400 and $1,000, 
respectively, if the husband and wife both apply 
and are otherwise eligible. In Utah (aged), an 
applicant may be eligible when he owns insurance 
with a cash value up to $500 and $300 in personal 
property (market value), exclusive of clothing and 
household furnishings. Washington (aged) pro¬ 
vides a maximum of $500 cash or loan value of 
insurance and $200 in cash and personal property, 
includmg livestock. 

In Connecticut, ownership of cash equivalent to 
a year’s maintenance does not disqualify an appli¬ 
cant for any of the three special types of public 
assistance. The applicant may be eligible, more¬ 
over, if he assigns personal property and life insur¬ 
ance, if in excess of $500, to the agency as required. 
In Idaho (aged and blind), the maximum is merely 
specified as a “reasonable amount.” In Maine, an 
applicant for old-age assistance with liquid assets 
up to an amount necessary for a year’s mainte¬ 
nance may be eligible; children may be eligible for 
aid to dependent children when their parent owns 
life insurance up to $500, with insurance on each 
child up to $250. Bank deposits up to $350 are 
also allowed, but a larger amount will not disqual¬ 
ify the applicant if the amount is approved by the 
supervisor of aid to dependent children. 

In Pennsylvania (aged and children), an appli¬ 
cant will not be disqualified for ownership of prop¬ 
erty not convertible into cash, excluding household 
goods, automobile necessary for transportation, 
compensation and damages for medical care, and 
veteran’s bonus; an applicant may also ovui $500 
insurance ($300 for children under 16 in aid to 
dependent children), with insurance over $500 to 
be assigned to the State agency. In Rhode 


Island, an applicant may be eligible for old-age 
assistance if the life insurance for husband and 
wife does not exceed $5,000 in face value; in both 
old-age assistance and aid to the blind, assignment 
of all insurance in excess of $300 is required, al¬ 
though an applicant for old-age assistance may 
retain up to $300 in cash or other assets for burial 
expenses. In California (blind), ownership of 
insurance up to $1,000 maturity value will not 
disqualify an applicant if the policy was in effect 
at least 5 years prior to application. 

In New Hampshire (children), the maximum is 
$500 in personal property and insurance up to $500 
for the parent and up to $150 straight life insur¬ 
ance for the child. In Washington (blind and 
children), an applicant is not disqualified by owner¬ 
ship of household goods, personal effects, livestock 
up to $150 in value, certain foodstuffs, and insur¬ 
ance with a maximum cash surrender value of 
$300 and loan value of $100, if the policy has been 
in effect for more than 5 years. In Vermont 
(blind and children), ownership of household fur¬ 
nishings and certain other property that permit 
the family to maintain standards of living com¬ 
parable with previous standards will not disqualify 
an applicant from receiving aid; in aid to depend¬ 
ent children, $1,000 insurance for the head of the 
family and $250 for the child are established 
maximums, but may be waived. 

Changes in Property Limitations in 1941 

The State legislation enacted in 1941 has general¬ 
ly relaxed property limitations as a condition of 
eligibility for assistance. During 1941, Alaska 
exempted personal property to the amount of $200 
under the provision of the old-age assistance law 
which could require an applicant to pledge his 
property as a guarantee for reunbursement of 
assistance granted. In Mmnesota, the provision 
that old-age assistance may not be paid to a person 
with property exceeding $5,000 was amended to 
add that, if the net value of his assets convertible 
into cash exceeds $300, or the combined convertible 
assets of husband and wife exceed $450, the appli¬ 
cant is similarly disqualified unless liquidation of 
assets would cause undue loss. Ohio amended the 
property limitation in the old-age assistance law to 
permit a waiver of the maximum upon assignment 
of the property in trust to the Division for Aid to 
the Aged. Utah amended the old-age assistance 


34 


law to increase the amount of assets an applicant 
may own and still qualify. 

Disposal of Property to Qualify for Assistance 

Most States provide in one or more of their plans 
that an applicant may be eligible if he has not dis¬ 
posed of property for the purpose of qualifying for 
assistance. Provisions of this type are found in 47 
of the 51 plans for old-age assistance, in 31 of the 
44 plans for aid to the blind, and in but 7 of the 47 
plans for aid to dependent children (table 28). 
Only 4 (Hawaii, Idaho, Louisiana, and Texas) 
exclude such a provision from all three types of 
assistance. 

While the most common provision is not limited 
as to time, many States provide a time limit, 
ranging from 2 to 5 years prior to application for 
assistance, during which a transfer of property for 
the purpose of qualifying for aid would disqualify 
the applicant: 


Time limit (years) 

Old-age 

assistance 

Aid to the 
blind 

Aid to 
dependent 
children 

Total____- 

47 

31 

7 



2 . 

10 

10 

3 

3 ... 

2 

1 

0 

5 

9 

8 

1 

None 

1 26 

12 

3 


1 Includes Minnesota, which provides, in effect, that a transfer of property 
tor the purpose of qualifying for assistance, made within 2 years prior to the 
passage of act of January 27, 1936, will disqualify applicant. 


In several of these State plans the provisions 
differ somewhat from the prevailing pattern. 

In California (aged), under an amendment en¬ 
acted in 1941 a transfer of property to qualify for 
aid does not of itself disqualify an applicant if the 
transfer does not deprive the applicant of the 
present use, enjoyment, or iucome of such prop¬ 
erty. In Michigan (blind), an applicant is not 
eligible if he disposed of property to qualify for 
assistance, or conveyed property to any person 
under a condition or agreement that such person 
should furnish support and maintenance, and such 
person is then living and able to support applicant, 
or if the property conveyed is subject to per¬ 
formance of the conditions or agreement. 

While most plans refer to disposal of property by 
the applicant, Iowa, Minnesota, and Wyoming 
(aged) include transfer of property by the spouse 
as well, and Arkansas requires that, to qualify for 
aid to dependent children, the guardian or custo¬ 
dian of the child must not have disposed of prop¬ 
erty for that purpose. 


In addition to the disposal of property to 
qualify, Ohio (aged), and Vermont (aged and 
blind) include disposal of income as well, and 
Wyoming (aged and blind) includes also the dis¬ 
posal of “resources.” Connecticut (under a 1941 
amendment for aged and blind) and Pennsylvania 
(children) disqualify an applicant if the disposal of 
property was without reasonable consideration. 
In Pennsylvania (aged), the provision is limited to 
property of $500 or more disposed of without fair 
consideration. In Maine (aged), an applicant is 
not eligible if he disposed of property to qualify or 
disposed of it without reasonable compensation. 

In addition to the usual provision that the 
applicant, to be eligible for assistance, must not 
have disposed of property “for the purpose of 
qualifying for aid,” in some States disposal of 
property for the purpose of getting increased 
assistance,®* or to preclude recovery for assistance 
granted,®^ or to evade the law ®® will disqualify an 
applicant. During 1941, three jurisdictions deleted 
provisions on disposal of property from their laws.®® 

Responsibility of Relatives and Others 

Many State plans provide that an applicant 
may be eligible for assistance if he has no relatives 
who are legally responsible and able to support 
him. This type of provision is frequently related 
to other provisions in poor laws or in the general 
laws of a State requiring specified relatives of a 
“poor person” or a “destitute person” to support 
him if they are financially able to do so, and 
authorizing judicial action to enforce such support 
if the relative refuses. 

Under a strict interpretation of the provisions 
constituting a condition of eligibility, the mere 
existence of legally responsible relatives able to 
support the applicant disqualifies him whether or 
not he is in fact receiving such support. In 
many States the construction given to the re¬ 
quirement is tempered by the circumstances in 
individual cases. Many States without a specific 
requirement of this type give consideration under 
other provisions of law to the ability of relatives 
to support the applicant, in determining the extent 
of the applicant’s need and the amount of assist¬ 
ance to be granted. In some instances the agency 

33 Illinois, Michigan, and Ohio (aged). 

3* Michigan and Iowa (aged). 

35 Rhode Island (blind) and Ohio (aged). 

35 Hawaii (aged, blind, and children), Idaho (aged and blind), and Wyo¬ 
ming (children). 















35 


grants assistance and may bring action against 
relatives who are able to support the applicant but 
refuse to do so, and thus attempts to recover the 
amount of assistance granted. 

No clear line can be drawn between provisions 
w'hich constitute conditions of eligibility and those 
which are considered in relation to determining 
the extent of need and amount of assistance. 
Somewhat less than half the States, for example, 
provide that an applicant may be eligible for 
assistance if he has no legally responsible relatives 
who are able to support him. In a few other 


States the provision is worded to include relatives 
who may not be legally responsible for the support 
of the applicant, or to include only relatives or 
other persons able and willing to support the 
applicant. Sometunes the requirement is limited 
to relatives able to support the applicant “without 
undue sacrifice,” or able to support him without 
depriving themselves or their families of necessi¬ 
ties and conveniences ordinarily included in the 
standard of living in the community. Under other 
provisions in State plans, a person may be eligible 
if he is not receiving adequate support from legally 


Table 28 .—Requirements relating to disposal of property to qualify for special types of public assistance, by State 

and program, December 1941 


State 

No provision 

Time limit preceding application i 

2 years 

3 years 

5 years 

No time limit 

A 

B 

c 

A 

B 

c 

A 

B 

A 

B 

c 

A 

B 

0 

Alabama... 



X 












Alaska_____ 


(’) 

(0 












Arizona..__ _ 



X 






X 






Arkansas..... 




X 

X 

X 









California..... 













■ 

^— 

Colorado.... 



X 







X 





Connecticut__ 



X 










■ 


Delaware____ 


(2) 

X 












District of Columbia... 


X 

X 












Florida... 



X 

X 

X 










Georgia........ 



X 

X 

X 










Hawaii.__ 

X 

X 

X 












Idaho..... 

X 

X 

X 












Illinois...... 



X 






X 






Indiana..___ 



X 






X 

X 





Iowa____ 



(>) 







X 





Kansas___ 



X 

X 

X 









Kentucky___ 



(*) 












Louisiana..__ 

X 

X 

X 












Maine_ 



X 









X 



Maryland...... 



X 




X 

X 







M assaehuset ts.... 


X 

X 






X 






Michigan__ 



X 






X 




X 


Minnesota_____ 



X 


X 







X 



Mississippi_ . . 



X 

X 

X 










Missouri. ___ . 


(>) 










X 


X 

Montana__ . . 


X 

X 

X 










Nebraska .......... 



X 









X 

X 


Nevada .... 


(0 

(*) 




X 








New Hampshire _ 







X 

X 

X 




New Jersey 


X 

X 









X 



Nfiw TVTpxiro 




X 

X 

X 












X 









X 

X 




X 

X 

X 











N’nrfh Dfilrnla 



X 









X 

X 


Ohin 


X 

X 









X 






X 






X 

X 







X 

X 









X 





m 


X 










X 



X 







X 


X 





X 

X 









X 






X 


X 







X 






X 

X 

X 












X 

X 












TTtflh 



X 






X 




X 





X 









X 

X 





X 






X 

X 







X 

X 









X 






X 









X 

X 





X 









X 






X 









X 

X 


















* No disposal of property, by assignment, transfer, or otherwise, within 
specified period preceding application. See text discussion of “Disposal of 
Property to Qualify for Assistance” for details. A signifies old-age assistance; 


B, aid to the blind; C, aid to dependent children, 
s No approved plan. 



















































































































































































36 


responsible relatives, and in Texas and Utah the 
plans specify that no investigation shall be made 
into the financial ability of relatives of an applicant 
for old-age assistance. In some States provision 
is made that a child may be eligible for aid to 
dependent children if relatives (limited in some 
instances to legally responsible relatives) are un¬ 
able to provide adequate care and support without 
public assistance. 

The plans generally specify liable relatives to 
include spouse, parents, grandparents, children, 
and grandchildren; and, occasionally, relatives of 
other degrees of relationship such as brother and 
sister. Iowa and Michigan have somewhat simi¬ 
lar provisions to the effect that an applicant for 
old-age assistance may be eligible if he has no 
person, municipality, society, association, or cor¬ 
poration legally or contractually responsible and 
able to support him. 

During 1941, several States enacted legislation 
regarding the responsibility of relatives to support 
applicants for public assistance. Nearly all the 
amendments permit the agency to take a more 
realistic position in considering the resources of 
relatives as affecting an applicant's eligibility. 
Arizona and California adopted a provision that 
the granting or continued receipt of old-age 
assistance is not to be contingent upon recovery 
from relatives for the support of the applicant or 
recipient. Hawaii removed for all three types of 
assistance the restriction that an applicant may 
be eligible only if he has no spouse, child, or 
parent financially able and legally responsible for 
his support. North Dakota amended the pro¬ 
vision that a child may be eligible for aid to 
dependent children if his “relatives liable under 
the law for his support are not able to provide 
adequate care and support for such child without 
public assistance,” to read “whose parent, guardian 
or custodian neglects or refuses to provide proper 
or necessary subsistence, education, medical or 
surgical care or other care necessary for his 
health, morals or well-being.” Ohio amended the 
old-age assistance law to provide that an appli¬ 
cant may be eligible if he does not have available 
to him sufficient income and resources from 
responsible relatives. Washington amended legis¬ 
lation for aid to the blind to provide that no 
relative, except of a minor, shall be legally respon¬ 
sible for supporting the applicant, and that aid 
to the blind shall not be denied on account of 


any obligation or duty of relatives to support 
the applicant. 

Receipt of Two or More Types of Assistance 

The Social Security Act requires that a State 
plan for aid to the blind must “provide that no 
aid will be furnished any individual under the 
plan with respect to any period with respect to 
which he is receiving old-age assistance” under an 
approved State plan.®^ This provision prohibits 
the simultaneous furnishing to any individual of 
money payments under approved plans for aid 
to the blind and old-age assistance. Several 
States, however, have adopted more extensive 
provisions. 

Aid to the blind .—All approved State plans for 
aid to the blind contain provisions meeting the 
Federal requirement. In 27 States ^ a person 
may not receive aid to the blind if he is receiving 
old-age assistance, in Massachusetts a person 
eligible for old-age assistance may not receive aid 
to the blind, and in Ohio provision is made for an 
eligible applicant to receive either old-age assist¬ 
ance or aid to the blind, but not both. In Mon¬ 
tana, New York, and North Carolina, an applicant 
is not permitted to receive aid to the blind if he is 
receiving old-age assistance or aid in behalf of 
dependent children. Twelve States^® provide 
that a person may not receive any other form of 
public assistance (including old-age assistance), 
except for temporary medical and surgical care; 
Nebraska also excepts vocational rehabilitation, 
fuel, and food. In Louisiana a person is not 
eligible for aid if he has been assigned to the 
W^ork Projects Administration. 

During 1941 Arizona, Idaho, and Wyoming 
added a provision in the law for aid to the blind 
that a person may not be receiving old-age assist¬ 
ance. North Dakota removed this provision but 
established a maximum age limitation of 65 years 
for aid to the blind. New Mexico and Ohio 
deleted from their laws the provision that a person 
receiving aid to the blind may not receive any 
other public assistance except medical or surgical 
care. 

>7 Section 1002 (a) (7). 

Alabama, Arkansas, California, Connecticut, District of Columbia, 
Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Maine, Maryland, Michi¬ 
gan, Mississippi, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, 
South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Washington, Wisconsin, 
and Wyoming. 

” Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Louisiana, Minnesota, Nebraska, New 
Hampshire, New Jersey, North Dakota, Oregon, Virginia, and West Vir¬ 
ginia. 



37 


Old-age assisiance. —Several State plans dis¬ 
qualify from old-age assistance a person who is 
receiving other forms of public assistance. Six 
States have similar provisions, permitting, how¬ 
ever, receipt of assistance such as temporary 
medical or surgical care. In Georgia, a recipient 
of old-age assistance may not receive aid to the 
blind; Iowa has a similar provision, exempting, 
however, preventive or remedial treatment for 
blindness. In Illinois a recipient of any county 
blind benefits is not eligible for old-age assistance. 
Louisiana disqualifies a person who has been 
assigned to the Work Projects Administration. 
During 1941, New Mexico removed from its old- 
age assistance law a requirement that a person 
may not receive any other public assistance, except 
for temporary medical or surgical care. 

Aid to dependent children. —Hawaii requires that 
a recipient of aid to dependent children may not 
receive any other public assistance except for tem¬ 
porary medical, dental, and surgical care, while 
New Mexico removed a similar provision from its 
law during 1941. Louisiana disqualifies a person 
who has been assigned to the Work Projects 
Administration. 

Other Eligibility Conditions 

Age Limitations 

Old-age assistance. —Under the Social Security 
Act, a plan for old-age assistance may not impose 
a minimum age requirement of more than 65 years. 
A State is not prohibited from establishing a lower 
age limit, but Federal matching is not available 
for old-age assistance payments to anyone who is 
less than 65 years of age. 

All jurisdictions except Colorado have a mini¬ 
mum age requirement of 65 years; Colorado also 
provides for assistance in certain cases to persons 
at ages 60-64, but these payments are not match- 
able by Federal funds. The laws of four States 
provide for lowering the age requirement in the 
event that the age limitation in the Social Security 
Act is reduced (table 29). Hawaii enacted such a 
provision in 1941. 

Aid to the blind. —The Social Security Act con¬ 
tains no age requirements or age limitations with 
respect to Federal matching in aid to the blind. 
In the 44 approved plans for aid to the blind, 

«Arizona, Nebraska, New Hampshire, South Dakota, Vermont, and 
Virginia. 


19 States provide no age limitations; 12 States re¬ 
quire a minimum age of 16 years; 7 States, of 18 


Table 29.—Age requirements for special types of public 
assistance, by State and program, December 1941 


State 

Old- 

age 

assist¬ 

ance, 

65 

years 

or 

over 

Aid to the blind 

Aid to dependent 
children 

None 

Minimum of— 

Un¬ 

der 

16 

years 

Under 
16 years 
or, if 
attend¬ 
ing 
school 
regu¬ 
larly, 
under 
18 years 

other 

16 

years 

18 

years 

21 

years 

Alabama_ 

X 

X 





X 


Alaska__ 

X 

(•) 




(') 



Arizona_ . 

X 

X 



X 



Arkansas_ 

X 


X 




X 


California... . 

3 X 


X 





3 X 

Colorado_ 

‘ X 

X 





X 


Connecticut... 

X 

X 





X 


Delaware_ 

X 

(‘) 





X 


District of Columbia 

X 

2 X 



X 



Florida_ 

X 


X 




X 


Georgia_ 

X 




X 

X 



Hawaii_ 

a X 

X 






3 X 

Idaho_ 

X 

X 





X 


Illinois_ 

X 

(■) 





X 


Indiana_ 

X 


X 


X 



Iowa_ 

X 



X 


(■) 



Kansas__ 

X 

X 





X 


Kentucky 

X 

(') 




(■) 



Tyonisiana 

X 

X 




X 


Maine 

X 


X 




X 


Marvland 

X 

X 





X 


M assachu.setts 

X 




X 


X 


Michigan 

X 


X 





3 X 

Minnesota 

X 




X 



3 X 

Mi.s.sis.sippi 

X 

X 





X 


Mis.sonri 

X 

(1) 






3 X 

Montana 

X 

X 





X 


Nebraska 

X 


X 



X 



Nevada 


0) 




(‘) 





X 



X 












New .Tersey 

X 




X 


X 



X 



X 



X 


New Vorlr 

X 

X 




X 





X 





X 



« X 



l»x 




3 X 

Ohio 

X 



X 



X 




(11) 




X 




X 

X 





X 




(0 





X 




X 




X 




X 




X 







X 


X 






X 



X 








X 



"X 

Utah 





X 


X 








X 




X 

X 





X 



» X 


13 X 




X 




X 





X 






X 


l‘X 





X 





X 












‘ INO auprovBU piau. . ........ , 

« Wiil be reduced to 60 if Federal requirement set at that level. 

> Under 18. ., , j oc / • 

* Assistance also provided to individuals between 60 and 65 years of age in 
certain cases; not matched with Federal funds. 

* For persons who become blind while residents! for others, 21 years. 

® For females; 21 years for males. 

f Under 17. , ^ • j •, vu • 

8 Under 14, or if under 16, regular school attendance required if child is not 
physically or mentally incapacitated. 

» Will be reduced to correspond to any reduction in Federal requirement. 
IK Eligible up to 65 years of age. . ^ . 

For persons who become blind while residents! for others, 5 years. 

13 Under 14. 

i> If not acceptable for education at State school for blind; otherwise 21 years. 
>8 Or at discretion of local agency. 





























































































































































































38 


years; and 6 States, of 21 years (table 29).^^ North 
Dakota is the only State with a maximum age 
limitation. This provision, enacted in 1941, 
specifies that aid may be granted to persons only 
until age 65. In four States (Florida, Massa¬ 
chusetts, New Mexico, and Oklahoma), which 
have no statutory provision with respect to age, 
limitations have been established by administra¬ 
tive action (table 29). During 1941, 4 States 
removed the minimum age requirements from their 
laws, and Ohio repealed its maximum age require¬ 
ment of 65 years. 

Aid to dependent children .—The Federal act de¬ 
fines a dependent child, in part, as one who is 
“under the age of sixteen, or under the age of 
eighteen if found by the State agency to be regu¬ 
larly attending school.” While States may 
establish more liberal age requirements. Federal 
matching is not available for aid to dependent 
children other than as defined in the Federal act. 

Twenty-seven of the 47 approved plans for aid 
to dependent children have adopted age limitations 
coextensive with those in the Federal act (table 29), 
and 5 of these States (Delaware, Idaho, Kansas, 
Washington, and West Virginia) have made pro¬ 
vision for liberalizing this requirement to accord 
with a change in the Federal act. Florida and 
New Mexico, which have no statutory provision, 
have established the age requirements by admin¬ 
istrative action. In the remaining 20 States, aid 
may be granted to children to age 18 in 4 States 
(California, Hawaii, Minnesota, and North Da¬ 
kota); to 17 years in Michigan; to 16 years in 

13 States; to 14 years in Texas; and to 14 years, or 
16 years if the child is found to be regularly 
attending school, in Missouri (table 29). 

During 1941, five States (Maine, Maryland, 
North Carolina, West Virginia, and Wyoming) 
amended their laws to include children from 16 
to 18 years of age when regularly attending school; 
New Mexico removed its age requirement from the 
law; Missouri lowered the 16-year age limitation to 

14 years, with provision for assistance to children 
up to 16 if they were regularly attending school or 
physically or mentally incapable of attending 
school; and Utah raised the statutory age limita¬ 
tion to 18 years. 


*> See footnotes 5, 6,11, and 13, table 29, for particular State exceptions. 

« Vermont and West Virginia (21 years), Wyoming (17 years), and Oregon 
(16 years). 

« Section 406. 


Residence Requirements 

To be approved, a State plan must have no resi¬ 
dence requirement more restrictive than those 
permitted under the Social Security Act. For 
old-age assistance and aid to the blind, the maxi¬ 
mum Federal requirement is residence in the State 
for 5 out of the 9 years immediately preceding ap¬ 
plication and 1 year immediately preceding appli¬ 
cation.^ An approved plan for aid to dependent 
children may not impose a residence requirement 
which excludes “any child residing in the State (1) 
who has resided in the State for one year immedi¬ 
ately preceding the application for such aid, or 
(2) who was born within the State within one year 
immediately preceding the application, if its 
mother has resided in the State for one year imme¬ 
diately preceding the birth.” The Federal act 
merely establishes maximums that a State may 
not exceed; matching Federal funds are therefore 
available to States with more liberal provisions 
and to those which have no residence requirement. 

Old-age assistance. —Thirty-eight States require, 
as a condition of eligibility, the maximum per¬ 
mitted under the Social Security Act (table 30). 

In five of these States, however, alternative provi¬ 
sions have been established. In Iowa a person ‘ 
may be eligible if “domiciled” in the State for 5 of 
the 9 years immediately preceding application. | 
Minnesota provides that a person who has resided 
in the State for 2 continuous years immediately 
preceding application may add the years of actual 
residence in the State prior to the 9 years preceding 
application to establish 5 years’ residence in the 
State. Nebraska provides, as an alternative, that 
a person may be eligible if he has resided in the 
State for 25 consecutive years at any time, and 1 
year immediately preceding application. In North 
Carolina, a person may also be eligible for old-age 
assistance if he has resided in the State for 2 of the 
5 years preceding application and 1 year immedi¬ 
ately preceding application. In Wisconsin, an 
applicant who has resided in the State for 1 year 
may be eligible for assistance if the State from j 
which he moved has undertaken to grant assistance 
to any resident of Wisconsin who has moved to and 
continuously resided in such State for 1 year. 

Three other jurisdictions also require 5 years’ 
residence. In Alaska, a person, to be eligible for 
assistance, must have resided there for 5 years out 

Sections 2 (b) and 1002 (b). 

M Section 402 (b). 







39 


of the 9 yeais immediately preceding application. 
Vermont and Washington require residence in the 
State for 5 years within the 10 years preceding 
application. 

In Louisiana, the required period of residence 
in the State is 3 years, and in South Dakota 2 
years, during the 9 years preceding application, 
with 1 year immediately preceding the application. 
Six States require merely that a person must have 
resided in the State for 1 year immediately pre¬ 
ceding application. In addition, Georgia provides 
that a person must have been a “bona fide resi¬ 
dent” of the State for not less than 1 year. New 
Hampshire has the most liberal residence require¬ 
ment for eligibility for old-age assistance, residence 
in the State for 6 months. 

During 1941, Hawaii amended the old-age 
assistance law, reducing the residence requirement 
from the maximum permitted under the Federal 
act to 1 year’s residence in the Territory imme¬ 
diately preceding application for assistance. 

Aid to the blind. —Thirty-three of the 44 
approved plans for aid to the blind require the 
maximum residence permitted under the Federal 
act (table 30), but 17 of these States provide 
alternatives for meeting this requirement. In 
Oregon, a child under 5 years of age may be eligible 
for assistance if bom within the State. In the 
remaining 16 States, the residence requirement 
need not be met if the applicant lost his sight 
while a resident of the State. A similar provision 
is qualified in 3 jurisdictions: Colorado specifies 
that the applicant must have continued to reside 
in the State and the District of Columbia that he 
must have resided therein for 1 year next preceding 
application; and in Washmgton, the loss of vision 
must have resulted from a cause that could not 
have been known to exist at the time of entry into 
the State. In 2 of the 16 States, applicants may 
also be eligible if they were blind residents in the 
State on a particular date: in Iowa, on July 4, 
1937 (date of passage of act); and in South 
Carolina, on May 13, 1937 (date of passage of 
State Public Welfare Act of 1937). 

In Louisiana the required period of residence in 
the State is 3 years, and in South Dakota 2 years, 
during the 9 years preceding application, with 1 
year immediately preceding application. 

Five States require residence in the State for 1 
year immediately preceding application, and 2 
States, Arkansas and Georgia, merely require 1 


year’s residence in the State. In Rhode Island 
and Arkansas, the residence requirement need not 
be met if the applicant lost his sight while a 
resident of the State. New Hampshire requires 


Table 30 .—Residence requirements for special types 
of public assistance, by State and program, Decem¬ 
ber 1941 i 


State 

Federal 

maximum 

‘‘6- 

year” 

provi¬ 

sion 

“1-year” 

provision 

Other 


Ai 

B2 

C3 

A 

A 

B 

c 

A 

B 

0 

Alabama_ 


* X 



X 


X 




Alaska__ 


0 ) 

(0 

X 






Arizona_ 

X 

<x 

X 








Arkansas_ _ 




X 

* X 

X 




California_ 

X 

X 





X 




Colorado_ 

X 

X 

X 








Connecticut-__ 

X 

X 

X 








Delaware__ 

X 

(») 

«x 





X 




District of Columbia_ 

X 

X 







Florida.... 

X 

X 





X 




Georgia.-__ 




X 

X 




(0 

Hawaii.. 



X 


X 

X 




Idaho. 

X 

X 





X 




Illinois__ 

X 

(0 

< X 

X 







Indiana_ . 

X 

X 








Iowa.... 

® X 

«x 

(*) 








Kansas_ _ 

X 

X 

X 








Kentucky... 

X 

0 ) 

(0 








Louisiana. . _ 





X 

8 X 

4 8 X 


Maine_... 

X 

X 

X 








Maryland . 

X 

X 





X 




Ma.ssachusetts-.. 

X 

X 

X 








Michigan. 

X 

^x 





X 




Minnesota 

0 X 

< x 

X 








Mississippi. 




X 





(') 

Missouri 

X 

0 ) 

X 

X 





ATnTit.fi,na 

X 

X 








Nebraska 

® X 

X 

X 








"MAVAda 

X 

G) 

(') 








New Hampshire_ 





X 

»x 

»x 


Maw .TAFSPy 

X 

X 





X 




New Mexico 

X 

*x 

X 








Maw Vork 

X 

X 

X 








Mnrt.h Pnrnlina 

® X 


X 



X 





Mort.h Dakota 

X 




X 

X 




Ohio 

X 

X 





X 




Oklahoma 

X 

<x 





X 




OrAyoTi 

X 

® X 

X 








Pafi n syl van i a 

X 

0 ) 





X 




"Rhoda Island 


X 


X 

‘x 




.Qnnth Oarolina 

X 

fl X 

X 








South Dakota 



X 





10 X 

4 lOx 


TAnnAs.sAA 

X 

X 

X 








T'Aras 

X 

X 

X 








TTtah 

X 

X 

X 








VArmont 


<x 

X 

X 







Virg'inia 

X 

X 

X 







'Wachinaton 


® X 


X 



X 




TV OOXJli-ig tV/i-l---* 

WAst. Virginia 





X 

X 

X 




WiQAonsin 

® X 

* X 





X 




Wyoming . . . 

X 

X 





X 
















t Schematic presentation of general provisions; see text discussion of “Resi¬ 
dence Requirements” for details. 

*5 of 9 years immediately preceding application and 1 continuous year 
immediately preceding application. A signifies old-age assistance; B, aid to 

^^fl^year immediately preceding application or born within State within 1 
year immediately preceding application if mother has resided in State for 
1 year immediately preceding child’s birth. C signifies aid to dependent 

< Not required if person became blind while resident of State. 

‘ No approved plan. 

« Alternative sometimes provided; see text discussion. 

1 No residence requirement. , ... 

* 3 years during 9 years immediately precedmg application, and 1 year 
Immediately preceding application. 

«6 months. 

ID 2 years during 9 years immediately precedmg application and 1 year 
immediately preceding application. 








































































































































40 


only 6 months’ residence in the State. Mississippi 
has no residence requirements for aid to the blind ; 
however, it is not the agency’s policy to accept 
applications from “transient blind.” 

During 1941, Hawaii and Oregon amended the 
residence requirements for aid to the blind. Ha¬ 
waii reduced the requirement from the Federal 
maximum to 1 year immediately preceding appli¬ 
cation. Oregon repealed a provision under which 
a person may be eligible if he lost his sight while 
a resident of Oregon, and added one under which 
a child aged less than 5 years may be eligible if 
born within the State. 

Aid to dependent children .—In 26 of the 47 ap¬ 
proved plans for aid to dependent children, the 
residence requirement is the same as the maximum 
permitted in the Federal act (table 30). Georgia 
and Mississippi have no residence requirement for 
aid to dependent children. The remaining 19 
States have several different types of residence 
requirements: 14 include a provision that the 
child must have resided in the State for 1 year 
immediately preceding application; and 5 (Cali¬ 
fornia, Delaware, Florida, New Jersey, and Wis¬ 
consin) include a provision which, with slight vari¬ 
ations in wording, has substantially the same effect. 

Thirteen of the 19 States include more liberal 
alternatives under which 1 year’s residence in the 
State of certain persons other than the child may 
qualify the child for aid: residence of parent or rela¬ 
tive (6 States),^® parent or guardian (Delaware), 
parent (California and Maryland), mother (Ala¬ 
bama, Michigan, and New Jersey), and person 
caring for the child (Wisconsin). The 1 year’s 
residence in the State is variously described as 
“preceding application,” “immediately preceding 
application,” “immediately preceding birth,” “im¬ 
mediately preceding grant of assistance,” and 
“continuous resident of State for 1 year.” 

In California a child may also be eligible merely 
if born in the State, and in Pennsylvania eligibility 
may be established if the child and parent or rela¬ 
tive standing in loco parentis have legal settlement 
or quasi settlement. 

With respect to children born within the year 
prior to application, the 26 State plans with the 
'maximum residence requirement permitted under 
j the Federal act include the provision that the child, 
to be eligible, must have been born in the State 


M Idaho. Louiaiana, New Hampshire, Ohio, Washington, and Wyoming. 


and its mother must have resided in the 
State for the year immediately preceding the birth. 
The remaining 21 plans include provisions of vary¬ 
ing degrees of liberality, ranging from the maxi¬ 
mum permitted under the Social Security Act to 
no restriction whatever. Eligibility of children 
under 1 year of age for aid under these provisions 
is based on the birth of the child within the State, 
residence of the child in the State substantially 
from time of birth, residence of mother, residence 
of person caring for child, or some combination of 
these factors. 

During 1941, five States ‘ enacted legislation 
liberalizing the residence requirements for aid to 
dependent children. Washington, Idaho, Wyo¬ 
ming, and Ohio amended their laws, which were 
previously coextensive with the Federal maximum, 
to include children whose parents or relatives had 
resided in the State for the year immediately 
preceding application; and in all these States 
except Washington, to include children under 
1 year of age if they were born in the State or had 
resided in the State substantially from time of 
birth. Idaho and Wyoming require also, in such 
cases, that the parent or relative must have resided 
in the State for the year immediately preceding 
the birth of the child. North Dakota amended its 
law with respect to children under 1 year of age to 
include a child who was born in the State and whose 
mother had resided in the State for the number of 
months immediately preceding birth which, when 
added to the age of the child, aggregates 1 year 
immediately preceding application. 

Citizenship Requirements 

The Social Security Act does not require, for 
approval of State plans, a citizenship requirement 
for assistance under any of the three programs. 
The act, however, prohibits a State from imposing 
any citizenship requirement for old-age assistance 
or aid to the blind which excludes any citizen of the 
United States.^^ 

Old-age assistance. —Twenty-nine of the 51 ap¬ 
proved plans for old-age assistance require that a 
person, to be eligible for assistance, must be a citi¬ 
zen of the United States (table 31). In 5 of these 
States, however, this requirement may be waived 
if the applicant has resided in the United States for 
a period varying among the States from 15 to 30 

« Sections 2 (b) (3) and 1002 (b) (2). 





41 


years/® North Carolina requires, as an alternative 
to citizenship in the United States, 10 years’ 
residence in the United States and a legal decla¬ 
ration by the applicant of his intention of becom¬ 
ing a citizen. Wisconsin provides that an appli- 

Iowa and Minnesota (25 years); North Dakota (30 years, 5 of which are 
continuous and immediately preceding application); Rhode Island (20 years); 
and Wyoming (15 years). 


Table 31 .—Citizenship requirements for old-age assist¬ 
ance and aid to the blind, by State, December 1941 



U. S. citizenship 

State 

Not re¬ 
quired 

Required 


A ‘ 

B 

A 

B 

Alabama_ 

X 

X 



Alaska_ 


(8) 

X ' 

X 


Arizona_ 


X 


Arkansas_ _ 

X 

X 


California_ 


X 

X 


Colorado_ 


X 

X 


Connecticut_ 



X 

X 

Delaware_ 


(») 

X 


District of Columbia_\_ 


X 

X 

Florida - ___ 


X 

X 


Georgia_ 

X 

X 


Hawaii_-_-_ 

X 

X 



Idaho _ 

X 

X 



Illinois _ 


(?) 

X 


Indiana_ 


X 

X 

Iowa _ 



3 X 

4x 

ICaDsas_ _ 

X 

X 



Kentucky_ 


(») 

X 

X 


LfOuisiana _ 

X 



Maine-- _ 


X 

X 


Maryland_ 


X 

X 


Massachusetts_ 


X 

X 


Michigan- _ 

X 

X 



ATinriAsnt.a ... . . . 


X 

s X 


Missi.ssippi _ i - __- -_ 

X 

X 



Missouri_ 

X 

(8) 

X 



Montana_-_ _ 

X 



Nebraska_ 

X 

X 



Nevada ___ 


(8) 

X 

X 


Npw Hamp.shire _ _ 


X 






New Jersey_ 


X 

X 


New Mexico__ 

X 

X 



New York- _ 



X 

X 

North Carolina_ 


X 

® X 


North Dakota . ___ 



f X 

X 

Ohio - _ 


X 

X 


Oklahoma_-__-_ 

X 

X 



Orppon _ 

X 

X 




X 

(=*) 

X 



Rhode Island__ 


® X 


South Carolina_ 


X 

X 


Ronth Dakota __- 

X 

X 



Tennessee _ 

X 

X 



Toxas ... _ _ 


X 

X 

Utah .. .-•_ -- _ 

X 

X 


Vermont _ 


X 

X 


X 

X 



Washington __ 

X 

X 



West Virginia _ 

X 

X 



Wi^rioTi.«:in . .. __ _ 


X 

«x 


WyoTTiing . . _ 


X 

10 X 








1 A signifies old-age assistance; B, aid to the blind. 

»No approved plan. 

» Or 25 years’ continuous residence in United States. 

< Or application for citizenship filed. 

* Or 25 years’ residence in United States. 

« Or 10 years’ residence in United States and legally declared Intention of 
becoming citizen. 

’’ Or 30 years’ residence in United States, 5 of which are continuous and 
immediately preceding application. 

8 Or 20 years’ continuous residence in United States. 

® Or born in United States. 

Or 15 years’ residence in United States. 


cant may be eligible for assistance if he is a citizen 
of the United States or was born in the United 
States. During 1941, Idaho enacted legislation 
eliminating the requirement in the law limiting 
old-age assistance to citizens of the United States. 

Aid to the blind .—Only 8 of the 44 approved 
plans for aid to the blmd require that an applicant 
must be a citizen of the United States (table 31). 
One of these States, Iowa, provides also that a 
person may be eligible for aid if he has applied 
for citizenship. 

Aid to dependent children .—Texas is the only 
State providing that a chUd, to be ehgible for aid 
to dependent children, must be a citizen of the 
United States. In Montana, a child is disqualified 
from receiving aid if its parents are aliens illegally 
within the United States. 

Institutional Status 

Under the Social Security Act, Federal match¬ 
ing is not available with respect to old-age assist¬ 
ance and aid to the blind to an individual who is 
an inmate of a pubUc institution.^® Federal 
matching is available for old-age assistance and 
aid to the blind payments made to residents of 
private institutions, if such payments are not 
prohibited under the State law. In aid to depend¬ 
ent children. Federal matching is limited to assist¬ 
ance payments with respect to children who are 
living with a relative “in a place of residence 
maintained by one or more of such relatives as 
his or their own home.”®® 

Inmates of public institutions .—-All State plans 
for old-age assistance and aid to the blind contain 
some provision with respect to institutional status 
as a condition of eligibility. In 11 State plans for 
old-age assistance ®^ and in 9 for aid to the blind,®® 
an applicant is disqualified if he is an inmate of, 
or being maintained by, a public institution, 
commonly described as “any municipal. State, or 
Federal institution.” In 12 State plans for old- 
age assistance ®® and in 5 plans for aid to the blind 
(Connecticut, Hawaii, Nebraska, North Carolina, 
and Ohio), the types of institutions are specified 
and include public institutions of a charitable, 

8® Sections 3 (a) (1) and 1003 (a) (1). 

»o Section 406. See pp. 42-44. 

M Arizona, Colorado, Illinois, Indiana, Maine, Minnesota, Mississippi, 
Nevada, North Dakota, Oklahoma, and Virginia. 

8® Arizona, Colorado, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, North Dakota, 
Oklahoma, Vermont, and Virginia. 

M California, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Iowa, 
Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, New York, Washington, and Wisconsin. 

















































































































42 


custodial, correctional, and curative nature; in 
some instances, these institutions are described in 
greater detail as almshouses, jails, prisons, work- 
houses, infirmaries, or insane asylums. The re¬ 
maining States have a more general provision, 
usually to the effect that a person may not be an 
inmate of a public institution at the time of re¬ 
ceiving old-age assistance or aid to the blind. 

Inmates of 'private institutions. —Five States deny 
old-age assistance (Connecticut, Kentucky, Mis¬ 
sissippi, Oklahoma, and Wisconsin), and 6 deny 
aid to the blind to inmates of private institutions. 
In 10 State plans for old-age assistance and in 8 
plans for aid to the blind,®® provision is made for 
granting assistance to inmates of private institu¬ 
tions in certain cases, as, for example, when the 
private institutions are approved, licensed and 
supervised, or visited and inspected by the State 
agency, or when residence in the private institu¬ 
tion is not on a contractual basis. The remaining 
States provide no disqualification for residents of 
private institutions. 

During 1941, Arizona, California, and Texas 
removed provisions in their laws which disqualified 
inmates of private institutions from receiving old- 
age assistance. 

Persons in need of continued institutional care .— 
Eleven State plans for old-age assistance include 
provisions which disqualify persons who are in 
need of continued institutional care; generally a 
person is disqualified if in need of such care because 
of his physical or mental condition. In 4 of these 
States (Arizona, Colorado, Iowa, and Minnesota) 
applicants are not disqualified unless institutional 
care is reasonably available; and in Michigan a 
person who needs continued institutional care may 
be eligible for assistance when properly cared for by 
certain relatives. 

Twelve State plans for aid to the blind ®® con¬ 
tain provisions which disqualify applicants who are 
in need of continued institutional care; three of 
these States (Alabama, Iowa, and Rhode Island) 
add “if such care is reasonably available.” New 
Jersey and Washington disqualify an applicant if 
he is afflicted mentally or physically so as to be a 
charge on a public institution or agency. 

M Arizona, Connecticut, Michigan, Okiahoma, Vermont, and West 
Virginia. 

“Arkansas, Illinois, and Massachusetts (aged); Alabama (blind); Cali¬ 
fornia, Florida, Iowa, New York, Rhode Island, South Carolina, and Ten¬ 
nessee (aged and blind). 

“ Alabama, Arizona, Colorado, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, 
Nebraska, New Hampshire, New York, North Carolina, and Rhode Island. 


Montana is the only State which provides that a 
child, to be eligible for aid to dependent children, 
must not be in need of continued care in a public 
institution because of physical or mental condition. 

During 1941, Idaho (aged and blind) and Oregon 
(blind) removed provisions of their laws which dis¬ 
qualified applicants in need of continued institu¬ 
tional care. 

Special Conditions Applicable to Aid to De¬ 
pendent Children 

Deprivation of parental support or care. —A de¬ 
pendent child is defined in the Social Security Act, 
in part, as one who “has been deprived of parental 
support or care by reason of the death, contmued 
absence from the home, or physical or mental 
incapacity of a parent.” ®^ 

With the exception of California and New York, 
all State plans include an eligibility requirement 
with substantially the same wording as the Federal 
act. In Hawaii, deprivation of parental support 
or care may also arise out of the cruelty, neglect, or 
depravity of a parent; and in North Dakota, a 
child may also be eligible for aid if he is abandoned 
by his parent, guardian, or custodian, or if the 
child’s parent, guardian, or custodian neglects 
him, or refuses to provide proper or necessary sub¬ 
sistence, education, medical or surgical care, or 
other care necessary for his health, morals, or 
well-being. 

In California, children may be eligible for aid if 
they are orphans, half orphans, abandoned chil¬ 
dren, or children of a father incapacitated for gain¬ 
ful work by permanent physical disability or by 
tuberculosis; orphans and half orphans include 
foundlings, children whose father’s whereabouts 
has been unknown for 3 years, dependent illegiti¬ 
mate children whose paternity has not been 
acknowledged or legally established, and children 
whose parent is imprisoned or committed to a 
Federal or State hospital. 

In New York, a mother may receive aid on 
behalf of her child or children if she is a widow or 
has been deserted by her husband for at least 1 
year; or her husband is under care in or on parole 
from an institution under the jurisdiction of the 
State Department of Mental Hygiene and is men¬ 
tally or physically incapacitated for providing 
support, or is confined under a sentence of 2 years 

« Section 406. 

/ 






43 


or more in a penal or correctional institution, or is 
permanently incapacitated and under care, or has 
tuberculosis and is receiving treatment in an insti¬ 
tution or discharged from such institution under 
certain conditions; or her marriage has been an¬ 
nulled or dissolved, or she has been granted a 
divorce valid m the State; or she is the mother of a 
child born out of wedlock, if it is to the interest of 
the child to remain under her care. Similar con¬ 
ditions with respect to the mother make the father 
or another relative eligible for assistance on behalf 
of dependent children. 

Relatives with whom child may live .—The Social 
Security Act defines a dependent child, in part, as 
one who “is living with his father, mother, grand¬ 
father, grandmother, brother, sister, stepfather, 
stepmother, stepbrother, stepsister, uncle, or 
aunt.”®® While States are not prohibited from 
granting assistance to children living with relatives 
and others not included within the scope of the 
Federal act. Federal matching is not available with 
respect to assistance in such cases. 

In only 2 of the 47 States with approved plans 
for aid to dependent children are the conditions 
of eligibility, with respect to the relative with 
whom a child may live, less inclusive than the 
list of enumerated relatives in the Federal act. 
In these 2 States, Minnesota and New Jersey, 
eligibility for aid is limited to dependent children 
who live with certain female relatives. 

The relatives specified in the Social Security 
Act have been interpreted to include the following: 
adoptive father, adoptive mother, grandfather-in¬ 
law (meaning the subsequent husband of the 
child’s natural grandmother, i. e., stepgrand- 
father), great-grandfather, grandmother-in-law 
(meaning the subsequent wife of the child’s 
natural grandfather, i. e., stepgrandmother), 
great-grandmother, brother-of-half-blood, brother- 
in-law, adoptive brother, sister-of-half-blood, 
sister-in-law, adoptive sister, uncle-in-law, aunt- 
in-law, great-uncle, and great-aunt (including great- 
great and more remote uncles and aunts). An 
adoptive grandparent relationship may be iucluded 
if the grandchild is the natural child of a parent 
who was adopted. If the grandchild is the adopt¬ 
ed child of a parent who was a natural child of the 
grandparent, the payment is not matchable by 
Federal funds unless under State law the adoption 

»«Section 406. 


creates a relationship between the child and the 
parent of the one who adopted it. 

More than half the States with approved plans 
for aid to dependent children extend eligibility to 
children who are liviug with one or more of these 
relatives; iu a few instances, the States have 
included some but not all these relatives. 

In some States, a child may be eligible for aid 
if he is living with one or more enumerated rela¬ 
tives, or “any other relative” approved by the 
agency, while the programs in a few States permit 
assistance to children regardless of their relation¬ 
ship to the person with whom they live; in such 
cases. Federal matching is available only for assist¬ 
ance to children who come withm the scope of 
the Federal act. 

During 1941, North Carolina enacted legisla¬ 
tion to include the relatives interpreted as coming 
mthin the scope of the Social Security Act. 
North Dakota amended its law to define a de¬ 
pendent child as one “living with a relative by 
birth, marriage, or adoption”; the law previously 
enumerated the relatives. 

Place of residence .—Under the Social Security 
Act, a dependent child is defined, in part, as one 
who is living with a relative “in a place of residence 
maintained by one or more of such relatives as his 
or their own home.” 

All but 3 (California, Delaware, and New York) 
of the 47 approved plans for aid to dependent 
children include a provision of this type as a con¬ 
dition of eligibility for aid. In 2 of the plans with 
such a provision, an alternative provision is added: 
In Hawaii, a child may be eligible for aid if he is 
living in a place of residence maintained by the 
relative as his own home, or in a family home or 
institution conforming to the standards fixed by 
the director of public assistance; and in North 
Dakota, the child may be eligible if living with a 
relative in a place of residence maintained as his 
own home, or in a licensed boarding home, or in a 
home maintained or provided by any child-caring 
or child-placing agency authorized under the State 
law. Federal matching is available, however, 
only with respect to assistance payments for 
children who come within the Federal definition. 

Seventeen States require that the child, to be 
eligible, must be living in a home or “suitable 
family home” meeting standards of care and health 

Section 406. 






44 

fixed by law and by the rules and regulations of the 
State agency.®® Ten other States include pro¬ 
vision to the effect that the home in which the 
child is living must be “suitable,” or “satisfactory,” 
or beneficial for the upbringing of the child.®^ 

Durmg 1941, Wyoming and Idaho repealed 
provisions that the home in which the child is 
living must meet the standards of care and health 
fixed by law and rules and regulations of the 
agency. North Dakota repealed the provision 
that the child may be eligible for aid if living in a 
“suitable home.” 

Definition of Blindness 

• Title X of the Social Security Act provides for 
aid “to needy individuals who are blind,” but the 
term “blind” is not defined in the act. Approved 
State plans for aid to the blind, however, contain 
definitions of blindness as criteria for determining 
the eligibility of applicants for assistance. These 
definitions reflect the recommendations of the 
Social Security Board, which has encouraged State 
agencies to adopt a definition of blindness which 
permits the inclusion of persons with economic 
blindness, i. e., with insufficient vision to perform 
tasks for which sight is essential. In terms of 
ophthalmic measurement, central visual acuity of 
20/200 or less in the better eye with correctmg 
glasses is generally considered economic blindness. 
An individual with a central visual acuity of 20/200 
can identify a standard object at a distance of 20 
feet, while an individual with normal vision can 
identify the same object at a distance of 200 feet. 
This statement relates to distance vision. A field 
defect in which the peripheral field has contracted 
to such an extent that the widest diameter of visual 
field subtends an angular distance of no greater 
than 20 degrees is considered equally disabling. 

A definition of economic blindness in general 
terms is included in the majority of plans for aid 
to the blind; the one most frequently found in 
State plans defines a blind person as “one whose 
vision with correcting glasses is so defective as 
to prevent performance of ordinary activities for 
which eyesight is essential.” Blindness or eco¬ 
nomic blindness is further defined in State plans 
in terms of ophthalmic measurements. The pro- 

Arizona, Arkansas, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Maine, 
Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Montana, New Mexico, Oregon, South 
Dakota, Tennessee, and West Virginia. 

•» Colorado, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Illinois, Maryland, Massa¬ 
chusetts. New Jersey, North Carolina. Ohio, and Oklahoma. 


vision which appears most frequently in State 
plans defines a blind person as one with central 
visual acuity of 20/200 or less in the better eye 
with correcting glasses. All State plans include 
this or a similar definition. 

All but 8 States®^ also consider as blind, indi¬ 
viduals who have a restricted field of vision. In 
22 States,®® the definition which is in terms of a 
maximum angular field of 20 degrees appears most 
frequently in the following form: “a field defect in 
which the peripheral field has contracted to such 
an extent that the widest diameter of visual field 
subtends an angular distance no greater than 20 
degrees.” In 7 States®^ a person may be deemed 
blind if he has a visual field defect comparable to 
20/200 or less visual acuity in the better eye with 
correcting glasses. Ten States®® define blindness 
of this type as a disqualifying visual field defect, or 
in similar terms, pursuant to which the judgment 
of the examining ophthalmologist or physician 
skilled in diseases of the eye is considered in making 
a determination of blindness. 

An examination by an ophthalmologist or a 
physician skilled in diseases of the eye is a require¬ 
ment in all approved State plans for aid to the 
blind, and the report of such examination is con¬ 
sidered in the agency’s determination whether the 
applicant is blind within the terms of the State 
plan. 

During 1941, Oregon removed from its law 
the definition of blmdness in terms of specified 
ophthalmic measurements and substituted a 
definition in economic terms, with the specific 
definition to be established by rules of the agency. 

Miscellaneous Provisions 

Many States include as conditions of eligibility 
certain requhements with a somewhat moralistic 
basis; the trend, however, has been toward the 
elimination of this type of requirement. 

Old-age assistance .—Three States have condi¬ 
tions of eligibility directed toward disqualifying 
criminals: In Georgia, a person is not eligible if 

M Arkansas, District of Columbia, New Mexico, North Carolina, North 
Dakota, Utah, Virginia, and Wyoming. 

M Alabama, Arizona, California, Connecticut, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, 
Maine, Maryland, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, New Hampshire, New 
Jersey, Oklahoma, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, 
Texas, Vermont, and West Virginia. 

M Louisiana, Massachusetts, New York, Ohio, Vermont, Washington, and 
Wisconsin. 

** Colorado, Hawaii, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Missis¬ 
sippi, New York, and Oregon. 








45 


he is detained by the State for the conviction of a 
crime; in Maine, conviction for a felony disquali¬ 
fies an applicant; and in Texas, “an habitual 
criminal’’ may not receive assistance. 

Four States disqualify “tramps,” “beggars,” 
or “drunkards.” In Texas, an “habitual drunk¬ 
ard” is not eligible for old-age assistance; in the 
District of Columbia, an applicant is not eligible 
if he is “an habitual tramp or beggar”; in Dela¬ 
ware, an applicant is disqualified if he has been a 
“professional tramp or beggar” within 1 year 
preceding application; and in New Hampshire, if 
he has been “an habitual tramp, beggar, or 
drunkard” within 1 year preceding application. 

In Iowa, an applicant is not eligible for old-age 
assistance if he or she has, without just cause, 
deserted the spouse or faded to support the spouse 
and chddren under age 15 for 6 months during the 
preceding 10 years. In New Hampshde, an appli¬ 
cant is not eligible if he has faded, without just 
cause, to support his wife and chddren aged less 
than 16 years for more than 6 months during the 
10 years preceding application. 

In Massachusetts, an applicant must be “de¬ 
serving.” In New Jersey, the applicant must be 
capable of deriving substantial benefit from the 
assistance provided. 

Aid to the blind .—In 8 States,®® refusal of treat¬ 
ment for the condition of blindness constitutes 
ground for denial of aid to the blind, ordinardy 
after a determination has been made that treat¬ 
ment may result in the improvement or restoration 
of vision. In 22 States,®^ an applicant is not eligi¬ 
ble for aid to the blind if he publicly solicits 
alms. 

In the District of Columbia, an applicant is not 
eligible if he can be rehabditated for self-support, 
if he has deprived himself of sight, or if he lost 
his sight during the perpetration of a criminal 
offense or by reason of vicious habits; applicants 
who are between 16 and 65 years of age and 
capable of working may be disqualified if they 

Alabama, Arizona, Colorado, District of Columbia, Minnesota, New 
York, South Carolina, and Tennessee. 

67 Alabama, Arizona, California, Colorado, District of Columbia, Florida, 
Georgia, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Michigan, Miimesota, New Jersey, New 
York, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, 
Washington, and Wisconsin. 


refuse work. In New York, an applicant is not 
eligible if he refuses to accept employment under 
reasonable conditions or to receive training to 
improve his condition. In New Jersey, an appli¬ 
cant is not eligible for aid to the blind if he has 
married another blind person since Aprd 7, 1921; 
if both blind persons were beneficiaries up to the 
date of the marriage, only one may continue to 
receive aid. In Texas, an “habitual criminal” or 
“habitual drunkard” may not receive aid to the 
blind. In Utah, assistance may be denied for 
refusal to accept rehabilitation services. Georgia 
disqualifies a person detained by the State for the 
conviction of a crime. 

Aid to dependent children .—In 5 States (District 
of Columbia, Massachusetts, Ohio, Vermont, and 
Wisconsin) a chUd may be eligible for aid to de¬ 
pendent children if living with a “proper” person, 
and in New York and New Jersey, if living with a 
person who is “mentally, morally and physically 
fit.” In Vermont, it must be to the benefit of the 
child to remain with the relative. 

In Wisconsin, the period of aid must be likely 
to continue longer than 1 year. 

1941 legislation .—Pennsylvania enacted legisla¬ 
tion during 1941, applicable to old-age assistance 
and aid to dependent children, providing that an 
applicant or recipient shall not “hereafter advocate 
and actively participate by an overt act or acts in a 
movement proposing a change in the form of 
Government of the United States by means not 
provided for in the Constitution of the United 
States.” 

Connecticut removed an earlier provision in the 
old-age assistance law which required payment of a 
poll tax as a condition of eligibility, and one which 
disqualified applicants who were on probation. 
Ohio similarly removed a provision which dis¬ 
qualified a person from receiving old-age assistance 
because of desertion and nonsupport, and also 
repealed a provision in the law for aid to dependent 
children wMch required that the person with whom 
the child lives must be morally, mentally, and 
physically fit. Khode Island and Oregon repealed 
provisions in their laws disqualifying a person from 
receiving aid to the blind for refusmg treatment 
to restore sight. 


o 










• .r 


V. 1 


MfJ*v w i'-i..-.t’v^’ v jj0 


'If'**-- -ll .• 


' *> ^ /• ‘ ^ 4 


If 


"'»■>'!■:' ■> , v', '^•• 





' f. 


h 




'4 I t • 

. V 


. i) 

4 > •» 


•V 

. ll 


' A'' ’"''''iS' '• '■' ■''*■ ' ■ ♦r -^ ••• ••' 


. ' * '■ t*'' i 
.•‘ m-,-. s'- 

‘t ;. 


• I. 



- .4 ^ I jm 

V. '''1! 




t \ 


.♦v 


V 


{ 








< r- 




>\i .rv' 


tK* 


i '* 


r>V>' ^ .-1 

fv, " #...4 ; . . . 

kr * 

: i\ ■ < 


.4 < ‘4 




■■:,! 



V ... . 




.' ■; •■< •'1. 


•■ ■ t-. 


A' K * » .\N > * * 

^ ^ - i ' 

' *• ■' .r. 1- •« 




’ ;n 

• ' 4*» 
t > * 


< ‘ 4 ' 

vr 


vv. 


•/ 


V 




'(-rv ■’ ,:' , 

-mV ' 


f f ■ 


I • 


r. « 


• ' 


.♦ A 


‘ *. f 


f •. I • J * W 4 

■'■ ' :- l 


I , 




f 






/ 0 - Ji .n‘ .; 


... N 


'"'-■ ■ r'.' 


^ mV ■ < 
i / 


I 't 


A ' \\*‘ 


.fe". mo ' ' ,-• ! '.<*« 


' ( 




r yAi' ' .^, . V. / 

' .* t.V.i ^ 





\ t ' 




< k 


< T ' 

»J • - 1, 


w 


I 


^ V 
'T- 


T- •'*' <.. !^'i..'; v.r J'r ■>, ”■ (';*!.■ • ■•■W 

•A ' MB r 


< j 

0 ■:* .'.»»•/••( 


ij 


'’r 


•4 ^ ^ 




I 

1 ; 


0. 


•-4 


' ■ 'rr» ■: 

. i' ' / 


;f 




\ -• J '/ r 

<■ •>- 






;: 1 


', A • / 

.v(> 

T /' .. . 


/ 


» 


\ 

. / 


. r 


< I 


' ^ 

■ ' .'■!!;)'4.^4;'' ,.,v*^ 

•»i 1 / r^* ‘ ^ 

. ■ , ■» ' f “ii 

• * »*** j.*» 



f \ r 


i ' l' 

-.■■■'■'»< .vm 


■ - -■• “* . V: 


jj/« ■? 


"MKi 


, J .4 
J, s 







' ’ ■'".' .'•■'A > ;■ •" W'V' 5/' ■ 





J. 




\ 


X , i'. . V.v.’..'' • '.:■ ;,.;, 




^'■..''S'_,n .■ . . .. 











■'A.^.A;VA^ :t,-: V, J 






FEDERAL SECURITY AGENCY 


SOCIAL SECURITY BOARD 
Arthur J. Altmeyer, Chairman 
George E. Bigge Ellen S. Woodward 


BUREAU OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 


Jane M. Hoey, Director 

Geoffrey May,* Associate Director Peter Kasius, Associate Director 
Anne E. Geddes, Associate Director 

Division of Operating Statistics and Analysis Division of Assistance Analysis 

Joel Gordon, Chief Anne E. Geddes, Acting Chief 


Division of Standards and Procedures 
Elizabeth Long, Chief 

Division of Plans and Grants 
Gertrude S. Gates, Chief 


Division of Administrative Surveys 
Rose J. McHugh, Chief 

Division of Technical Training 
Agnes Van Driel, Chief 


Field Division 
Mary E. Austin, Chief 


•On leave. 


UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON : 1942 














ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS 

Under the 

SOCIAL SECURITY ACT 
November 1942 



federal security agency 
SOCIAL SECURITY BOARD 
BUREAU OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 
Public Assistance Report No. 6 






FEDERAL SECURITY AGENCY 

SOCIAL SECURITY BOARD 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 


Arthur J. Altmeyer, Chairman 


George E. Bigge 


Ellen S. Woodwaurd 


BUREAU OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 


Jane M. Hoey, Director 
Gertrude S. Gates, Assistant Director 

a 


STANDAEDS AND PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT DIVISION STATE PLANS AND MANAGEMENT DIVISION 


j. Sheldon Turner, Chief 


Gertrude S. Gates, Chief 


FIELD DB'ISION 


STATISTICS AND ANALYSIS DIVISION 


Mary E. Austin, Chief 


Anne E. Geddes, Chief 


TECHNICAL TRAINING SERVICE 


Agnes Van Driel, Chief 



FEDERAL SECURITY AGENCY 
SOCIAL SECURITY BOARD 
BUREAU OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 


ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS UNDER THE SOCIAL SECURITY ACT 

NOVEMBER 1942 


Thomas G. Hutton and Elizabeth T. Ailing 
Statistics and Analysis Division 


PUBLIC ASSISTANCE REPORT NO. 6 


WASHINGTON, D.C. 


MARCH 1944- 





r 




m 


mmsot 


■: V- 




hm *««# (^UMrtola^ iiewiwtv 8iafr # 

j^ltenrq irt# iris 4iw4iii8^ rriE«f ^ #«Jbi xtofri 

fl» 4i-K3t ♦wwrtjii^ •rfi 1^' «>idr«^eljaisb*; baa 


oJtJ 


Oi* 8‘W «#x5PBti»q ait;«a«* 

f<h#jn5 ^ is^t xUjumsm:' 

'^f I8d' i^i^r iMtXw is*. iwi -U ‘ 

Ito airi<m 'a b«i«N^ ia:)fbdiiT4Mii»ji '-.taw^il aor 

i<#048-'15(64 ^ttXmifji 

bSJ9^ . »wi. wfm0t<M nT 66Sa^ii,r-«ai^, 

Ahrm^'Ac^ ;|sa!>n«irClX{X rto^oal mijr XJbajab 




' ..Hms^ «ai 3 [|«iM< 4 ‘:te» 'iri jmf<S bXwfa 

0«iV Jfiif li-ijairtan lt» »4^f^»o«» i^Cif ffJt tixm ^^all injiJ 




*»0|||*'.’ 

:iAimmm^ih!^ •rwbwwqi'.'ri exsoi^at 

Wliuiaab 9rjA t» AWi^AilmJaB, ai j^ 

. ^ceta*»l •ai’ JtUdp <r«l«t erf^ *re>t 


jRis ii(rikiy‘S»^ai8,' art^ /rtbriof bti6«jr?'^‘ aart aiax£aaii a 
i.v tda4tj^3 •oa/^ilaab adcf to 16 

•aObaJhfiH 



.;^9#:MnUQ 

•dlbiNfaiaai obl^^ ta inittniaf 



■ - ^S: -M 

■*' I * 








CONTENTS 


ZSfie 

Payments in November 1942. 2 

State Differences. 6 

Additional Assistance in Certain States. 10 

Changes Since November 1940..... 12 

Regional Variations In Payment Levels. 13 

Patterns of Need. l8 

Relationship Between Patterns of Assistance and of Need. 21 

Reasons for Differences in Patterns. 25 

Administrative Standards Reflected In Assistance Patterns. 25 

State Maxlmums. 23 

Legally Defined Levels of Living. 29 

Inadequacy of State Funds. 31 

Federal Matching Provisions. 32 

Supplementary Assistance . 39 

Conclusion. 4l 

Charts 

Chart 1.—Old-age assistance; Range of payments, November 1942..,. 7 

Chart 2.— Aid to the blind: Range* of payments, November 1942. 8 

Chart 5.--Aid to dependent children: Range of payments to 

families, November 1942. 9 

Chart 4.--Old-age assistance; Relative levels of payments, by 

State, November 1942. 15 

Chart 5.-^Ald to the blind: Relative levels of payments, by 

State, November 1942. 1^ 

Chart 6.—Aid to dependent children: Relative levels of 

payments, by State, November 1942. 17 
























Page 

Chart 7.—Distribution of amounts of assistance needed as 

established by agencies in two States. 19 

Chart 8.--Types of assistance patterns. 22 

Chart 9.--Old-age assistance: Payments in relation to Federal 

matching maximum, November 19^2. 33 

ChsLTt 10.--Aid to the blind: Payments in relation to Federal 

matching maximum, November 19^2. 3^ 

Chart 11.—Aid to dependent children: Payments in relation to 

Federal matching maximums, November 19^2. 35 

Chart 12.--Aid to dependent children: Payments in relation to 
Federal matching maxlmums, by number of children, for all 
States, November 19^2. 36 

Tables 

Table 1.—Old-age assistance: Distribution of payments to 

recipients, November 19^2. 3 

Table 2.—Aid to the blind: Distribution of payments to 

recipients, November 19^2..... 4 

Table 3.--Aid to dependent children: Distribution of payments to 

families, November 1942. 5 

Table 4.--Old-age assistance: Payments in relation to State 

maxlmums, November 1942. 24 

Table 5.—Aid to the blind: Payments in relation to State 

maxlmums, November 1942. 25 

Table 6.--Aid to dependent children:. Payments in relation to 

State maxlmums, November 1942.... 27 

Table 7.—Old-age assistance; Estimated Federal contribution 
to average payments in November 1942, by State, 
classified according to per capita income... 38 

















ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS UNDER 
THE SOCIAL SECURITY ACT 
November 19^2 


All groups concerned with public-asel8tance--reclplent8, staffs of pub¬ 
lic assistance agencies, legislators, and the general public alike, want to 
know how much assistance Is given to Individuals. The average payment, 
commonly used to Indicate the general level of assistance, obscures the great 
variations In actual payments. The most comprehensive Information available 
on the size of payments Is the number of monthly payments made at each dollar 
Interval. Once a year, through the cooperation of the State agencies adminis¬ 
tering State-Federal programs of old-age assistance, aid to the blind, and aid 
to dependent children, this Information Is assembled for each State. For the 
most part, the payments analyzed In this report cure those made for November 
19 ^ 2 . 

Various patterns emerge from the array of payments by amount. Some 
I reflect the need of recipients, others the effects of legislative, fiscal, or 
I administrative provisions. To understand how each of these factors affects 
the size of payments Is Important In considering proposals for changes In pro- 
I visions for assistance, 

I The Influence of some factors, such as Inadequacy of funds or specified 

I limits for payments, can be seen more clearly In statistical data than can the 
I Influence of administrative procedures. National summaries of assistance pay¬ 
ments, as of any other aspect of the operation of the State-Federal public 
assistance programs, can be made only at the national level, where certain 
uniform data from all \inlte are available. On the other hand, the lack of 
uniformity In the practices of the State and local units makes analysis diffi¬ 
cult at the Federal level and may sometimes result In Incomplete Interpreta¬ 
tion. 


Assistance payments frequently do not represent the total Incomes of 
recipients; assistance often supplements Income from other sources. To relate 
amounts of assistance to the need of recipients, statistical data on the living 
arrangements of recipients, the amounts of their requirements, and the amounts 
of their Income from other sources are needed. The Social Security Board has 
only fragmentary Information of this kind. Fortunately, understanding of 
assistance patterns and of their Implications for recipients Is furthered from 
time to time by research In State agencies. A few State studies have been 
drawn upon as Illustrative material. 

This report Is regarded merely as one step In the long process of 
developing comprehensive Information on assistance payments. Since that 
process requires pooling all currently available Information, further State 
contributions are Invited to a common fund of much-needed Information on 
assistance payments. 






- 2 - 


PajrmentB In November 19^2 

The amoimte of payments made to recipients for Novemher 19^2 spread over 
a wide range—from $1 to $170 per recipient of old-age assistance, from $1 to 
$102 per recipient of aid to the blind, and from $1 to $193 P«r family for aid 
to dependent chlldren.l/ Despite this great spread, the hulk of the payments 
made In the various States were concentrated within much narrower limits 
(tables 1-3)., The following tabulation shows, for each program, the proportion 
of payments made In the country as a whole at amounts grouped by $10 Intervals. 


Percent of payments 


Amount of payments 

OAA 

m 

ADC 

Total ------------- 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

Less than $10.00 ------------ 

10.7 

8.9 

5.4 


31.1 

29.8 

26.8 

20.00-29.99 . 

31.1 

26.7 

15.5 

50.00-39.99 . 

16.4 

17.2 

18.2 


10.6 

8.4 

13.1 

50,00 or more ------------- 

.1 . 

9.0 

21.0 


The majority of the payments for old-age assistance and for aid to the 
blind were In amounts ranging from $10 to $50, The most conspicuous differ¬ 
ence In the distribution of payments was that only a negligible proportion of 
aged, as compared with 9 percent of the recipients of aid to the blind, 
received payments of $50 or more. Nearly 97 percent of such payments of aid 
to the blind, however, were made In California, 

Aid to dependent children differs from the other two programs In that a 
single payment Is made In behalf of all children aided In a family, whereas for 
old-age assistance and aid to the blind, two eligible Individuals In a family 
usually receive two separate payments. This difference between programs Is 
reflected In the tabulation at two points. More payments were made for aid to 
dependent children In amounts ranging from $10 to $20 than at any other Inter¬ 
val, This conce^ntratlon Is due to the fact that the largest group of families 
cdded receive assistance for only one child. 


Payments for all programs are reported by State agencies by $1 Intervals. 
Since data on actual amounts of payments In dollars and cents are not 
available, for the purposes of this report all payments are regarded as 
made at the lower level of the Intervad, For example, an actual payment 
of $40.85 is reported as a payment made In the Interval of $40,00-40,99. 
Such a payment In this report Is regarded as a $4o payment. 













Table 1.—Oldf^age aeelstance: Dlatrlbuiiua of paYmente to recipients, NoTember 1942 


State 


Total, 51 States. 


Alabama . 

Alaslca.. 

Arizona..*... 

Arkansas... • 

California... • 

Ooloreido* * .. 

Connecticut.......... 

i^el aware.. 

District of Columbia. 
Tlorida. 


Georgia.... 

Hawaii..... 

Idaho...... 

Illinois... 

Indiana*... 

Iowa*.. 

HeAsas..... 

Kentucky... 

Louisiana*. 

Maine...... 


Maryland.. 

Massachusetts 2/* 

Michigan.. 

Minnesota*.. 

Mississippi 1 /. 
Missouri \jt 
Montana..... 

Hebraska..... 

Meyada*...... 

Hew Hampshire 


Hew Jersey...... 

Hew Mexico...... 

Hew York 2/*«*>* 
Horth Carolina*. 
Horth Dakota.... 

Ohio. 

Oklahoma........ 

Oregon... 

Pennsylyania 2/* 
Rhode Island.... 


South Carolina. 
South Dakota... 
Tennessee 1/... 

Texas*.. 

Utah*.......... 

Vermont..*..... 

Virginia....... 

Washington..... 

West Virginia.. 
Wisconsin...... 

Wyoming..*.*.*. 


Humber 

of 

payments 


2,241,615 


21,483 

1,565 

9,595 

24,717 

15‘^.395 

42,304 

17,098 

2,183 

3.360 

43,454 

70,841 

1,587 

9.773 

150,811 

69,600 

55,692 

30,646 

53.99‘^ 

38,124 

l6,l4o 

15,400 

85,098 

90,082 

62,660 

26,712 

113,381 

12,245 

29,308 

2,148 

7,239 

29,008 

5,109 

117,210 

38,966 

9,308 

138,548 

78,331 

20,871 

94,685 

7,395 

21,609 

14,681 

40,667 

181,55*+ 

14,250 

5,393 

19,180 

64,005 

22,811 

52,886 

3,513 


Percent 


Less 

than 

$ 10.00 

$ 10 . 00 - 

$ 20 . 00 - 

$ 30 . 00 - 

$40.00- 

$ 50.00 

19.99 

29.99 

39.99 

49.99 

Bora 

10.7 

31.1 

31.1 

16.4 

10.6 

0.1 

62.1 

31.8 

2.6 

3.3 

.2 

(2) 

— 

12.8 

30.1 

27.3 

29.7 

.1 

• 1 

.9 

5.9 

30.7 

62,4 

— 

37.7 

52.5 

9.0 

.8 

e^- 

— 

.3 

2.6 

7.4 

26.1 

63.6 


.1 

1.3 

4.8 

31.6 

62.2 


1.5 

7.8 

33.2 

39.7 

17.8 

— 

26.5 

56.8 

16.7 

6176 

— 

— 

.3 

8.5 

29.6 


— 

18.6 

64.2 

14.7 

2.3 

.2 


66.7 

29.8 

2.9 

.6 

— 

— 

6.1 

73-5 

17.1 

2.2 

1.1 


1.3 

17.8 

42.8 

25.6 

12.5 


1.0 

16.2 

41.8 

30.6 

10,4 


3.*+ 

42.4 

42.8 

9.3 

2.1 

'.2) 

3.0 

24.0 

70.5 

2.5 

— 

-a— 

2.3 

33.2 

38.9 

18.9 

5.9 

.8 

41.5 

58.4 

.1 

— 

•a-e- 


23.9 

58.6 

l4.1 

2.9 

.4 

.1 

2.0 

37.5 

40.0 

20.5 


■ 

7.5 

•41.4 

37.9 

12.2 

1.0 

2.9 

.8 

5.3 

17.2 

37.1 

36.7 

3.6 

45.2 

40.1 

10.0 

1.1 


1.9 

27.0 

48.9 

22.2 

Jz) 


60.3 

38.8 

.8 

.1 


21.6 

63.8 

13.8 

.8 



1.0 

28.2 

49.8 

15.6 


1.4 

45.4 

44,1 

9.1 

9.2 


.1 

10.3 

14.5 

65.9 


2.4 

30.2 

42.9 

18.7 

5.8 

•*— 

1.4 

25.7 

55 .*+ 

15.3 

2,2 

— 

12.9 

48.8 

25.3 

9.4 

2,9 

•7 

1.2 

22.1 

41,4 

27.1 

7.8 

.4 

48.0 

46.2 

*+.9 

.9 

— 


5.8 

51.8 

31.1 

7.1 

4,2 

-a— 

.6 

9.7 

59.2 

28.0 

2*5. 

aaa* 

3.8 

49.2 

31.9 

11.1 

4,0 


.9 

27.9 

4o.8 

22,4 

8.0 


2.3 

24.1 

44,9 

25.6 


(2) 

1.7 

26.0 

38.7 

29.3 

*+.3 

52.5 

43,8 

^.7 

—— 

. — 

— 

3.8 

46.1 

47.2 

2.9 



38.3 

52.6 

9.1 

-— 



2.7 

48.5 

48.8 

—— 

2.8 

a— 

1.3 

8.5 

35.0 

52.2 

•2 

6.1 

49.8 

34.4 

9.7 


■ ■ ■ ' 

45.9 

1.1 

45.3 

4.2 

8.8 

13.3 

42.7 

38.7 

— 

10.2 

58.8 

22.9 

H 

2.4 


1.6 

26.5 

42,0 

24.4 

5.5 


.7, 

16.8 

47.0 

30.4 

5.1 



^ L“fro:nrs“o^:Jrrt:tr;:«i::i.'s b^udSf ^e z s zuizii uXii izz: 

2 / Less than O.O 5 percent. , , v ^ 


recipients. Distribution is as follows! 
0.05 percent. 


Less than $5.00, 37.0 percent; $5.00-9.99. 63 .O percent; $10.00 or more, lees than 

s lees than minimum amount proscribed 


5 / I^cLd^'p^ents of general assistance to another person in family if his budget deficit i 
for ouch payments - $ 3.90 per month. 


601139 0 - 44 -2 












































































Tal>le 2.*—Hd to the hllndi Dletrlhutlon of pajaente to reclplente, Eoreahor 1942 


State 


Total, 44 States. 


Alahama*.. 

Arizona*.... 

Arkaxisas. 

Califomla**-.....*.... 

Colorado*.. 

Connecticut*. 

District of Columhla*.. 

Tlorlda*.. 

Georgia*.. 

Hawaii ^ . 

Idaho.... 

Indiana....... 

Iowa... 

lansae..... 

Louisiana... 

Maine....... 

MarT'land....... 

Massachusetts... 

Michigan* ... 

Minnesota.............. 

Mississippi........ 

Montana*... 

Nebraska*.. 

New Haaipshire*... 

New Jersey.... 

New Mexico.. 

Now fork ^... 

North Carolina*.. 

North Dakota*.......... 

Ohio............. 

Oklahoma... 

Oregon.... 

Hhode Island 2/«. 

South Carolina. 

South Dakota.. 

Tennessee..... 

Texas.. 

Utah... 

Vermont......... 

Virginia.... 

Washington*.... 

West Virginia. 

Wisconsin*.. 

Wyoming... 


Percent 


Number 

of 

Less 

$10.00- 

$20.00- 

$30.00- 

$40.00- 

$50.00 

peymentt 

than 

19.99 

2y.99 

39.99 

49.99 

or 


$10.00 





more 

54,205 

8.9 

29.8 

26.7 

17*2 

8,4 

1/ 9.0 

645 

55.8 

39.2 

4.3 

.5 

.2 

- 

4l4 


2.9 

16*4 

31.7 

49.0 

— 

1.159 

25.5 

56.0 

15.4 

3.1 



6,748 

*2 

.9 

2.7 

6.0 

20.5 

^ 69.7 

632 

1.6 

3.8 

11.9 

41.9 

40,8 

— 

173 

1.2 

8.1 

28.3 

38.1 

24,3 


291 


3.8 

19.9 

51.6 

24.7 


2.704 

11.4 

68.1 

17.0 

3.2 

.3 


2,189 

42.7 

46.7 

7.5 

3.1 



76 

5.3 

52.6 

31.6 

9.2 

1.3 

— 

275 

1.8 

21.8 

31.7 

24.0 

20.7 


2.350 

.5 

9*1 

50.6 

31.0 

8.8 

(4) 

1.529 

2.0 

17.3 

4o,4 

23.4 

16.9 

— 

1.295 


29.3 

35.1 

21.5 

9.0 

1.9 

1.434 

14.1 

51.5 

23.6 

8.4 

1.9 

1} .5 

1.035 

1.3 

28*5 

42*4 

27.8 



564 

3.2 

29.6 

36*2 

30.1 

.9 

— 

1,062 

2.8 

13.2 

39.9 

44,1 

— 

— 

1.369 


22.9 

37.0 

28*4 

10.4 


1.030 

.4 

11.1 

44.1 

33.5 

9.8 

gj 1.1 

1,352 

39.8 

56.4 


*8 



314 

1.0 

26.7 

34.1 

25.5 

12.7 


721 

1.3 

37.7 

46,2 

i4,8 


--- 

326 

1.8 

23.9 

40*5 

29.5 

4.3 

—— 

696 

.9 

16.5 

54.9 

23.0 

4.7 


24i 

12.4 

36.9 

26.6 

12.9 

8.3 

2.9 

2.728 

1.1 

17.3 

38.9 

28.9 

11.6 

2*2 

2.239 

6*6 

70.1 

17.3 

6.0 



137 

4*4 

37.9 

40.9 

12,4 

4*4 


3,882 

4,0 

31.9 

435^ 

16*8 

4*2 

— 

2,153 

3.5 

39.9 

26.8 

13.6 • 

16,2 

rr T- 

438 


13.9 

27*2 

41.3 

10.5 

7.1 

96 

1.0 

37.5 

33.3 

21.9 

6.3 


818 

52.3 

42.2 

5.5 




260 

l4,6 

62.3 

18.1 

5.0 

„- 

— 

1,659 

38.3 

48.7 

13.0 




3.879 

.6 

28.2 

46.6 

24,6 

-- 


153 

2.0 

17.0 

20,9 

43.8 

9.8 

6.5 

156 

5.8 

20.5 

36.5 

37.2 



1.057 

25.8 

56.6 

l4,6 

3-0 

— 

— 

933 

.2 

2.0 

10.2 

29.6 

58.0 


1,008 

5.5 

40,7 

30,2 

12.5 

11.1 

-a— 

1,857 

1.1 

19.6 

37.8 

4i.o 

.5 

... 

128 

“““ 

12.5 

36.0 

37.5 

10.9 

2/ 3.1 


Payments In excess of $9C were made to only 0*2 percent of all recipients. 
^ Bepresents payments of exactly $90. 

V Computed on base lees than 100. 

^ Less than 0.03 percent. 

Xxcludes q>eclal payments for Items not regularly budgeted. 



































































5 


^ dapVBdMt «Mldr*&t DlctrlVatloa of p« 7 MDto lo faailloo, loToabor 19^ 



I 

i 


Lmo thAD 0»09 poreont. 

Sat« aro for Ootobor 19^2. 

Data ara for Saptoabor X9^. 

Sselodoi ipoelal pa»«aat« for ItOBo not roc^ilarl/ bad«ato4. . - , 

5/ ^Soa payiwnto to sanaral aaalotonco raolplaata «bo art aoabora of faalUaa raoalTla« aid to dapandaat ehlldw. ordara, 

6/ Data from a apodal Incli^lo* 94 paroant of actoal naabar of ftfdUaa raoolTiiic aaalatanea la Ootobar 1942, 


\ 










































































. 6 - 


There is a second concentration at $50 or more; 21 percent of the 
families received payments in this range. These payments, however, are 
spread over a wide range of amounts as follows: 


Amount 


Percent 

of total payments 


$ 50 . 00 - 59.99 . 8.9 

60.00-69.99. 5.9 

70.00-79.99. 2.9 

80.00-89.99. 1.5 

90.00-99.99. .9 

100.00 or more ------------ .9 


Although other factors have doubtless influenced some of the payments, these 
larger amounts generally were paid to larger families. 

State Differences 


A national distribution is necessarily a compoeite of varied State dis¬ 
tributions but it obscures differences among States. State differences in 
payments are shown in charts 1-3. 1110 bar for each State represents the total 

range of payments, from the lowest to the highest. The shaded segment of the 
bar represents the interquartile range, that is, the middle half of the total 
range. One-fourth of the payments fall below and one-foiirth above the inter¬ 
quartile range.^ The median, or middle payment, is marked off on the bar by 
the heavy vertical line. Hie variation in payment distributions among States 
is illustrated by comparison of the range, interquartile range, and median of 
payments in one State with those in another. 

States may make virtually the same range of payments but because of 
concentration of payments at one or several points the pattern within the 
range may vary considerably. For example, California made payments for old- 
age assistance ranging from $1 to $40, while the range in Mlesleslppl was 
from $4 to $40. In California, however, the middle half of the- range of pay¬ 
ments was from $36 to $40, with a median of $40, whereas in Mlesleeippi the 
interquartile range was from $7 to $10 and the median, $8 (chart 1). 


17 -—- 

In a few States where there are great concentrations of payments at the 
maximum amount, no payments are above the median or upper quartile. 














- 7 - 


CHART I 

OLD-AGE ASSISTANCE; RANGE OF PAYMENTS, NOV. I 942 t 

DOLLARS 

0 10 20 30 40 50 

51 

STATES 
COLO. 

ARIZ. 

CALIF. 

NEV. 

WASH. 

MASS. 

CONN. 

ALASKA 
D.C. 

UTAH 
ILL. 

WYO. 

IDAHO 
N.Y. 

OHIO 
PA. 

R. l. 

N.J. 

OREG. 

WIS. 

KANS. 

MINN. 

MONT. 

N.H. 

IOWA 
MAINE 
IND. 

MD. 

V1ICH. 

NEBR. 

3. DAK. 

OKLA. 

TEXAS 
N.DAK. 

N.MEX. 

/T. 

W.VA, 

HAWAII 
FLA. 

MO. 

DEL. 

LA. 

ARK. 

TENN. 

KY. 

N.C. 

VA. 

S. C. 

ALA. 

GA. 

MISS. 



m 


—m 




1 

1 

■ 


1 



1 



1 



1 



1 

-- WM/MWM - 

114 


-; . WM/zM/M/m - 



^ 






60 















170 

- 1 - 

















116 






























78 




















—-- 

- v/AmM\ —- 



68 



MEDIAN 



V- 

INTERQUARTILE RANGE 


f SEE FOOTNOTES, TABLE /. 






















































































































































































































- 8 - 


CHART 2 

AID TO THE BLIND: RANGE OF PAYMENTS. NOV. 1942+ 

DOLLARS 

0 10 20 30 40 50 

44 

STATES 
CALIF. 

WASH. 

ARIZ.* 

COLO. 

D.C. 

CONN. 

OREG. 

UTAH 
WYO. 

IDAHO 
MASS. 

MINN. 

N.Y. 
iNO. 

IOWA 
MICH. 

MONT. 

N.H. 

N.J. 

VT. 

WIS. 

KANS. 

MAINE 
MD. 

R. l. 

TEXAS 
OKLA. 

NEBR. 

OHIO 
N.MEX. 

N.DAK. 

W.VA. 

HAWAII 
LA. 

N.C. 

FLA. 

S. DAK. 

ARK. 

VA. 

TENN. 

6A. 

MISS. 

ALA. 

S.C. 



LOW 


MEDIAN 



INTERQUARTILE RANGE 


tSEE FOOTNOTES, TABLE 2. 




































































































































































- 9 - 


CHART 3 

AID TO DEPENDENT CHILDREN: RANGE OF 
PAYMENTS TO FAMILIES. NOV. I942t 


DOLLARS 

0 25 50 75 100 125 150 


47 

STATES 

MASS. 

CONN. 

R. l. 

CALIF. 

N.Y. 

N.H. 

OREG. 

WASH. 

UTAH 

D.C. 

MAINE 

HAWAII 

PA. 

WIS. 

MICH. 

OHIO 

KANS. 

MINN. 

N.MEX. 

ARIZ. 

COLO. 

DEL. 

IDAHO 

ILL; 

MD. 

MO. 

MONT. 

NEBR. 

N.J. 

N.DAK. 

VT. 

W.VA. 

WYO. 

S. DAK. 
FLA. 
IND. 

LA. 

TENN. 

OKLA. 

GA. 

VA. 

MISS. 

ALA. 

ARK. 

N.C. 

S.C. 

TEXAS 




LOW 


MEDIAN 

I 


y/////////////, 


INTERQUARTILE RANGE 


HIGH 


'f'SEE FOOTNOTES, TABLE 3. 





























































































































































































- 10 - 


Under all three programs, States showed great variation In the amounts 
paid to recipients. This variation is illustrated by the following compari¬ 
son of the Interquartile range of payments in the highest and lowest ranking 

.States.2/ 

Interquartile range of payments 
Progr^Tn Lowest State Highest State 


OAA 

$7 

- 10 

$38 

- 44 

AB 

7 

- 12 

47 

- 50 

ADC 

V 6 

- Ik 

44 

- 80 


Payments in all other States ranged between the extremes of the highest and 
lowest ranking States (tables 1-3 and charts 1-3). This report is largely- 
devoted to dlBCueslon of factors which are at least partly responsible for 
these marked State differences. 

Additional Assistance in Certain States 


For four States the payments shown in tables and charts do not 
Include all assistance given under the special types of public assistance. 

In most instances -the amounts omitted could not readily be added to the 
regular payment in the annual report on amounts of assistance. Between 1 
and 2 percent of the total payments for old-age assistance and aid to 
dependent children and a smaller proportion of the payments of aid to the 
blind are omitted. Although the additional payments represented a small 
fraction of the totals for these types of assistance in the United States, 
they were significant in the States in which such payments were made. 

In Missouri, a special legislative appropriation in December 19^2 per¬ 
mitted eiddltional payments of old-age assistance to restore assistance to 
100 percent of the amount of established need for November and December. 
Eetroactlve. payments for November, averaging about $5.50^ were made to aged 
recipients still on the rolls in December. The amount paid retroactively 
added 4l percent to the total payments made in November in this State. 

About 85 percent of the families receiving aid to dependent children 
in Pen^ylvanla had milk orders in addition to money payments. The State 
agency estimated that the cash equivalent of these orders added more than 
8 percent to the toted money payments. 

New York and Massachusetts made additional money payments because of 
emergency needs, usually medical. Massachusetts made such payments to about 
one-twelfth of the recipients of old-age assistance and to about one-eighth 
of the families receiving aid to dependent children; New York, to about 


Eank determined by the median (charts 1-3). 

Payments were unusually low in Texas because of a $10 cut in September, 
October, and November. Under new State policy, the reduction in payments 
was restored in December, but assistance was limited to families whose 
other resources did not meet as much as 30 percent of their requirements. 
This situation affected all data in this report for aid to dependent 
children in Texas. 









- 11 - 


one-seventh of the recipients of old-age assistance and about one-eighth of 
the recipients of aid to dependent children and of aid to the blind. The 
distribution of the amounts of the additional mon^ payments in 
Massachusetts, Missouri, and New York is shown below, ty |10 intervals.^ 


Percent 



Less Uian 
$10.00 

110.00- 

19.99 

120.00- 

29.99 

$30.00- 

39.99 

$ 40 . 00 - 

49.99 

$50.00 
or more 

OAA: 

Massachusetts - 

-74.2 

13.6 

4.1 

2.2 

1.3 

4.6 

Missouri - - - 

-99.9 

(6) 

(6) 

— 

— 

— 

New York- 

-77.0 

15.2 

4.6 

1.9 

.7 

.6 

ADC: 

Massachusetts - 

-72.6 

14.6 

7.4 

2.1 

Q 

3.0 

New York - - - 

-54.0 

21.1 

8.9 

5.6 

4.2 

6.2 

AB: 

New York- 

-71.6 

15.8 

7.8 

3.0 

.9 

.9 


Although the majority of the additional payments were small, some in 
Massachusetts and New York were much larger than the regular payments which 
they supplemented, especially in Massachusetts, where the entire cost of a 
period of emergency medical care mey be included in one monthly payment. 


The average monthly payments reported in the Social Security Bulle'M.n 
include the additional payments for these States and Pennsylvania. 

6 / 

Less than 0.05 percent. 












- 12 


Changes Since November 19^0 

Information on amounts of individual payments was first assembled in 
November 19^0. Between that date and November 19^2, prices and, in some 
States, revenues rose markedly* Assistance payments also were higher in 
November 1942. The median payment for the United States rose from $19 to 
$22 for old-age assistance, from $20 to $25 for aid to the blind, and from 
$29 to $50 per family receiving aid to dependent children. Median payments 
of old-age assistance increased in nearly all States; those for aid to the 
blind and aid to dependent children, in a majority of States.?/ 

In both old-age assistance and aid to the blind, the proportion of 
payments below $20 was smaller in November 1942 than in November 1940. The 
proportion at $50 or more Increased one-half for old-age assistance, and 
more than one-fifth for aid to the blind. In aid to dependent children, 
likewise, relatively more payments were made at higher amounts; the propor¬ 
tion at $50 or more was one-fifth above that in November 1940, in spite of a 
slight Increase in payments under $20. 

These comparisons for the United States do not reveal the full extent 
of the rise in the level of payments because of the effect of differences in 
the representation of individual States in the national case load. In some 
States the number of recipients increased; these were mostly States that made 
relatively low payments. Large declines in case loads, especially for aid to 
dependent children, occurred more often in States with high payments. During 
this period, therefore, many cases that had received relatively high payments 
were closed, whereas many of the new cases received relatively low payments. 

Only l8 States made payments for old-age assistance of as much as $40 
in November 1940; the nvmber of such States had risen to 54 by November 1942. 
Thirty-one States made payments at $40 or more for aid to the blind in the 
latter month as compared with 18 States in the earlier month. 


Median payments in November 1942 were at least $5 higher than in November 
1940 in the following States: 

Old-age assistance ; Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Montana, 
Rhode Island, Texas, Utah, Washington. 

Aid to the blind : Arizona, Arkansas) Colorado, District of Columbia, 
Indiana, Kansas, Montana, Oklahoma, Washington. 

Aid to dependent children ; California, District of Columbia, Indiana, 
Kansas, Massachusetts, Missouri, New Mexico, New York, Oklahoma, O^gon, 
Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Utah, Washington, West Virginia. 










- 13 - 


Regional Vprlatlone In Payment Levels 

The cost of living varies from one section of the coimtry to another. 
In part, because of variation In the cost of goods and services and in part 
because of climatic dlfferences<, The need of Individuals varies with the 
cost of living and also with differences in consumption habits. Need also 
varies among areas with differences in general levels of income. Thus, 
individual need varies with geographic location. It would be extremely 
valuable to know to what extent these socio-economic factors influence need 
in specific geographic areas. While much work has been done in defining 
socio-economic regions, the present state of knowledge does not permit 
quantitative determination of the extent of regional differences in need. 

Any marked tendency for pajcnent levels to vary regionally could, however, be 
interpreted as resulting at least partly from regional differences in need. 


1 Levels of assistance payments have usually been defined in terms of 

I the average assistance payment for the State and the relation of that figure 
! to the national average. Since detedled information on payments is avall- 
j able, it seems advisable to broaden the definition beyond a single measure, 
j Consequently, States have been classified as making payments for each program 
1 at one of three levels on the basis of the interquartile range and median of 
; their payments, measures which disregard the extremely high and low payments, 

! For convenience these levels have been designated as upper, middle, and lower. 
States have been classified according to the interval in which the quartlles 
! and median fall. Class intervals were chosen arbitrarily, using the same 
limits for old-age assistance and aid to the blind.8/ Because payments for aid 
to dependent children are reported in terms of amounts per family, different 
j intervale have been used for this program.9/ States in which the quartlles and 
the median did not fall in the same level have been classified according to the 
level in which two of these three measures fell.10/ Since the boundaries of 
I these levels wore chosen arbitrarily and the selection of different intervals 
I would result in a somewhat different grouping of States, these levels must be 
j regarded as relative and are so used in this report. 


ST- 

Class intervals used for old-age assistance and aid to the blind are as 
follows; 


Level of payment 

Lower 

Middle 

Upper 

2 / 

Class intervale used for aid 
Level of payment 

Lower 

Middle 

Upper 


s Flrst quartile 

^10 or less 

11 - 20 
21 or more 


Median 
$15 or less 
16 - 25 
26 or more 


to dependent children are as 
First quartile Median 

$15 or lees $25 or less 
16 - 50 26 - 40 

51 or more ^1 or more 


Third quartile 

$20 or less 
21 - 50 
51 or more 

follows: 

Third quartile 

$55 or less 
56 - 50 
51 or more 


10 / 

The States In which one measure fell at a level above that In which the 


State was classified are: 

Old-age assistance: Hawaii, Rhode Island 

Aid to the blind : Florida, Kansas, Oklahoma, South Dakota 

Aid to de pendent children : Hawaii, Michigan, Ohio, Wisconsin 



















A geographic dlstrihutlon of the relative levels of pajmente for old- 
age aaslstance la shown In chart 4. The area In which pegrments were made at 
the lower level Is largely confined to the Southern States, Delaware "being 
the chief exception. In contrast, payments made at the upper level were not 
confined primarily to contiguous States. Two "blocks of States In opposite 
parts of the country and some scattered States made payments at the upper 
level. Eight States In the West, two In the Middle West, and four In the 
East made payments at the higher level. Payments In the remaining States were 
at the middle level. Alaska made old-age assistance payments at the upper 
level; Hawaii, at the lower. 

With few exceptions, payments to the blind In all but one region were 
at the same general level as to the aged. The exceptions Include widely 
separated States—Louisiana, Oregon, and Hawaii; In these three jurisdictions, 
payments to the blind were at a higher level than to the aged. In the Middle 
West, fou-T States (Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, and Minnesota) made payments to 
the aged at the middle level and payments to the blind at the upper. One 
State In the Middle West, Ohio, made lowsr payments to the blind than to the 
aged (chart 5)* 

The majority of States, 2h out of hj, made payments for aid to depend¬ 
ent children at the middle level; 12 made them at the lower level and 11 at 
the upper level, as these levels arb defined for this program. The States 
with payments at the lower level form a contiguous block covering the South¬ 
east and part of the Southwest. Four Western States and six Atlantic States 
made payments at the upper level (chart 6), 

It Is possible to distinguish a few areas in which groups of States 
made payments at a common level. The solid block of Southern States, with 
lower-level payments, is the most clearly defined area. A lees well-defined 
area of upper-level payments is In the Far West, and a similar area appears 
In the Northeast. Payment levels for the rest of the Nation show little 
regional uniformity. Despite the areas mentioned, there would seem to be 
little justification, therefore, for positive conclusions regarding regional 
differences in need. 





- 15 - 






























































































































































































































































































































































































































CHART 5 

AID TO THE BLIND: 

RELATIVE LEVELS OF PAYMENTS. BY STATE. NOV. 1942 


16 



f NO STATE- FED ERA L PROOF A M 






































































































































































































































17 


i 



I 





















































































































































































































































































































































































































- 18 - 


Patterns of Need 


If putllc assistance is properly to achieve the objective established 
by an agency, the amounts of assistance paid to recipients should correspond 
to the amounts needed by them as determined by the application of the agency’s 
standards. Whether payments correspond to the amounts needed can be Judged 
by arraying the amoxmts of assistance needed by individual recipients in 
patterns corresponding to the distributions of assistance payments and by 
comparing the two patterns. 

Decision on the amount of assistance needed by a recipient involves 
the determination of his minimum requirements for maintaining health and 
self-respect, estimates of the cost of these requirements, and consideration 
of the resources that can be applied toward meeting these costs. In most 
agencies, the amount of assistance needed is determined by a visitor, who 
interviews the applicant or recipient and applies standards developed by the 
State agency to his individual situation to determine his "budget deficit," 

In Massachusetts, Information was compiled on the amounts of assist¬ 
ance needed for a sample of the old-age assistance case load. Similar 
material was prepared for all families receiving aid to dependent children 
in New Mexico,ll/ From these State data a chart was prepared to show the 
veirylng amounts of assistance needed by recipients in these two States as 
established by the assistance agencies (chart 7)* Such arrays of the amounts 
needed by the individual recipients or families provide a pattern of assist¬ 
ance needed, as contrasted with a pattern of assistance, obtained by arraying 
the amounts of payments. To maice the general outline of these patterns of 
need stand out clearly, a smoothed curve has been superimposed on each dis¬ 
tribution; for all practical purposes these curves may be regarded as the 
patterns of need established in the two States represented. 

Obviously patterns of need can be expected to differ from State to 
State, at least in range and detail because of some differences in the methods 
of determining need. Variations occur because of different standards for 
requirements and resources and because of differences in the cost of goods 
and services, the resources available to recipients, and the number of persons 
for whom an assistance payment is planned. 12/ State standards differ in the 

w 

The data on budget deficits in New Ifexico Include medical assistance when 
needed; those for Massachusetts Include the cost of certain types of 
medical care for chronic cases but exclude emergency medical €U 5 eistance. 

12 / 

Information received from Texas for a sample comprising about 7 percent of 
the case load in September 1942 showed the following distribution of the 
amounts of budget deficits by $10 Intervals. Need for medical care wais 
Included in computing the budget deficits. 


Amount 

of deficit Percent of families 

Amount 

of 

deficit 

Percent of families 

Less than $10.00 - - - 

1.2 

^ZbVoo 


69.99 - 

. 10.0 

10.00 

- 19.99 - 

9.5 

70.00 


79.99 - 

. 4.0 

20.00 

- 29.99 - 

- - 17.0 

80.00 

- 

89.99 - 

. 2.6 

30.00 

- 39,99 - 

- - 20.2 

90.00 


99.99 - 

. 2.3 

40.00 

- 49.99 - 

- - 18.0 

100.00 

or 

more - 

- .7 

50.00 

- 59.99 - 

















Chart 7 

DISTRIBUTION OF AMOUNTS OF ASSISTANCE NEEDED 

AS ESTABLISHED BY AGENCIES IN TWO STATES 



tBASED ON 6% SAMPLE OF THE CASELOAD 


t+0.5% OF PAYMENTS IN EXCESS OF $125 






















































































































































































































- 20 


extent to which they recognize the requirements of members of the family for 
whom the recipient is responsible or who are necessary to his care. The 
range in the amounts of assistance needed and, presumably, the proportion of 
recipients with high amounts are greater where such requirements are recog¬ 
nized, The inclusion of requirements for medical care also widens the range 
of need and, in aid to dependent children, tends to obscure the differences 
between the requirements of families of different sizes. Ususilly only one 
member in a family requires costly medical care in any one month, and such 
costs for a one-child family frequently equal the subsistence costs for a 
larger family. 

As shown by the distributions for the two States in chart 1, rela¬ 
tively few persons in these States were found to need the same amounts of 
assistance. In New Mexico, where budget deficits of the families receiving 
aid to dependent children were determined in amounts that ranged from $6 to 
$l66, only 2 families In 100 needed the same amount. In Massachusetts the 
amoimt of old-age assistance needed by recipients was established in amounts 
ranging from $1 to $ 82 , with hardly more than 7 recipients in 100 needing 
the same amount. These distributions also show that the need of relatively 
few recipients was established at very small or very large amounts. Recip¬ 
ients with small amounts of need ai’e chiefly those whose resources nearly . 
equal their requirements. Those needing greatest amounts of assistance are 
recipients with unusual requirements and with small or no resources other 
than assistance. These two characteristics of the patterns of need—a wide 
range of amounts of assistance needed with few recipients needing the same 
amounts, and a relatively small proportion of persons in need of very small 
or very large amounts—can be regarded as common to all States, From this 
limited point of view, the patterns for Massachusetts and New Mexico can be 
regarded as illustrative of State patterns of need in general. 

Just as State differences in the detail of the pattern of need can be 
expected, so it can be anticipated that the patterns will differ for the 
various programs. In aid to dependent children, assistance is planned for 
families of varying sizes; the resulting distribution of amounts of assist¬ 
ance needed is significantly different from that in old-age assistance, as 
can be seen by a comparison of the two curves in chart 7. The general 
pattern of assistance needed for aid to the blind, however, can be assumed 
to be rather similar to that for old-age assistance, except that the major 
part of the distribution would probably fall at somewhat higher amounts in 
aid to the blind. Because seldom more than one member of a f ami ly receives 
aid to the blind, the requirements of an individual more often include the 
total cost of such household items as rent and fuel, which, in old-age 
assistance, is frequently divided between two recipients. 


- 21 


Relationship Between Patterns of Agslstance axd of Need 

In a few States the dlstrihutlons of the amounts of pajinents for 
November 1942 form patterns vhich are generally similar to the smoothed 
curves shovn in the Illustrative patterns of need. In most States, how¬ 
ever, the distributions of payments, or assistance patterns, differ sig¬ 
nificantly from the Illustrative patteras of need. The nature of this 
divergence can be seen from a description of the types of assistance pat¬ 
terns, several of which are shown in chart 8, Type A represents an assist¬ 
ance pattern that conforms generally to the illustrative pattern of need 
for old-age assistance shown in chart 7. In some States, part of the pay¬ 
ments are distributed as in type A, but the range is suddenly cut off and 
the remainder of the payments pile up at the highest dollar amount (type B). 
The distributions in certain other States follow this pattern except for the 
fact that a few payments exceed the amount which seems to have cut short the 
general distribution (type C), In still other States, all payments are 
concentrated at a few low amounts, or most are concentrated at relatively 
high amounts (types D and E). The distributions in some States are 
characterized by clusters of payments at amounts which vary from State to 
State but are frequently in multiples of $5 or $10. Especially in patterns 
for aid to dependent children, clustering is likely to occur at the amounts 
of the Federal matching maximums, even in States which permit payments at 
any amount needed (type F). 

Relatively few State assistance patterns in November 1942 exhibited 
general conformity to the illustrative patterns of need. Obviously other 
factors as well as need frequently Influence amounts of payments. Whether 
a State’s assistance pattern is of one or another of the types described 
depends only in part on the need of recipients; often it depends more on the 
legislative and administrative policies of the State.and of the Federal 
Government, the fiscal ability of the State and local units, and on the 
public concept of the purpose of the program. 








- 22 - 


CHART 8 

TYPES OF ASSISTANCE PATTERNS 



PERCENT 







































- 23 - 


Heasong for rifferencee In Patterns 

Information available at the present time is not sufficiently detailed 
to explain fully the differences "between the distrihutlon of need and of 
assistance. Only the more obvious factors influencing the size of payments 
can be discuBsed. 

Administrative Standards Reflected in Assist ance Patterns 

In the States in which the even gradation of payments at successive 
dollar amounts is interrupted by concentrations at multiples of $5 and $10, 
need is apparently determined less exactly than by dollar laterals for a 
considerable number of recipients, or payments are made at multiples of p 
desuite more exact determination of need. A comparison p as^stance pat- 
ter^is in 19U2 with those in 19^0 shows progress in a number of Statp 
toward more evenly graduated distributions of payments as pe of 

need has become more Individualized. Concentrations at other inte^^e^e 

nrohably determined, as was suggested for the distributions of establlshe 
Led, the general application of specific State standards without ^ch 
adjustment to Individual situations. Both these deviations from smooth 
distributions represent approximate, rather than close, oonfo^ty o pay 
ments to established need, but they present less serious problems for 
recipients than certain other assistance patterns. 

State ivlaxifflums 

Few State patcems of assistance showed as wide a r^e as the Illus¬ 
trative patterns of need In chart 7. The pattern of need for 
ance shoL that nearly three-fifths of the recipients in 

more than $30 per month, over one-fifth needed more th^ $1*0, md 1 recipient 
In 25 needed mLe than $50. Although the proportion of payments needed ac 
iLL or higher amounts can be expected to differ In 

LveLLless,^Sate laws or policies limit the monthly payment, thus 
cutting off the range permitted. 

In November 19U2, the maximum old-age assistance 
$45 a iLrin 2 StaLs $40 In 23 States, $30 In 15 States, $^ In 3 States, 
Ld $20 in 2 States. State maxlmums l^^ed parents of ^d ^^he blind 

cal care; somewhat lower maxlmums anplled to most recipient- ag 

aaslstance and aid to the blind (taolee 4 and 5). 


S'of5!s;‘ 

assistance in January 19^5. 











24 


Tftbl# U*—atalttaae«: Pa 7 B«nt« 1 a rAlatloA to Stato Baxlnjit, VoToabar 19U2 ^ 


Stata 


fatal* Stataa 


Total* U6 Stataa 
with aazijaaaa. 


llataaa.. 

llaaka. 

▲risona. 

Arkaaaaa«*.. 

California*. .. 

Colorado*. . 

Coanaotleut. 

Dalavara. 

Dlatrlct of Colnabia**...*•• 
Tlorlda. 

Oaorgla. 

Hawaii. 

Idaho ... 

Illlnola. 

Indiana. ••••*•* . 

Iowa. 

Kanaaa. 

Kantaeky.. 

LonlalaBA. 

Maina. 

Mar^rland. 

Naaaaahuaatta*. *... 

Miohlcan. . . 

Minnaaota*.***. 

Mloalaaippi.... 

Miaaoarl.*.... 

Montana. 

Vahra«a.... 

VaTjtda. 

law biiapablra. 

F Jaraap. 

law Maxloo. 

law Tork.*. 

forth Carolina*.***•••*•***• 

lorth Dakota. 

Ohio. 

Oklahona. 

Orafon*.*.. 

PannajlTania. 

Bhoda lalaad*•••*..••****••* 

South Carolina*. 

South Dakota*... 

Tannaaaaa.. 

... 

Utah. 

Taraont.*.*. 

Tlrglnia. 

Vaahiafton*. •••*.* . 

Vaat Tirslnia. •**•• 

Wiaoonain. 

V^oaia^.. 


Uaual 

naxiaua 

Pareant 


It uaual 

aaziaoa 

▲howa uaual 
aaziauB 

Izeaptlona to uaual aaxiana 

— 

9.8 

0.6 


— 

11.2 

.7 


$U 0 

•2 

... 

. 

>^5 

ik.k 

—• 


ho 

62.4 

— 



.9 

63*6 




0 

— 

1 

40 

17.8 

... 


25 

6.4 

— 


30 

61.6 



40 

*2 

... 


30 

.6 

... 


40 

1.1 

... 


40 

12.5 



40 

10.4 


Indiana: Paymanta Day azcaad $40 In aaount nacaaaary to 

40 

1.9 

.3 

include medical aaaiatanca 

25 

20.6 

15.3 

Iowa: $22 aaxiaua for raaipiant llrln^ in fauily. Additional 

lo nazinua 

-- 


aaount up to $5 for ehronie aadieal naada 

30 

0 

— 


Ho aaziauB 

— 

... 


30 

20.5 



30 

10.9 

2.2 

$40 BaziauB for raeipianta naadin^ aadieal eara 

lo aazlaua 


... 


40 

1.1 

... 


30 

22.2 

... 


30 

*1 

... 


30 

•8 


Total payaanta to huahand and wife nay not azaaad $45 

30 

9.1 

11*9 

$40 aaziauB for raeipianta naadin^ aadieal eara 


9.1 

... 



9.2 

... 


35 

.7 

7-9 

$40 aaziaua for raeipianta naadin^ aaar^aaey aadieal eaira 

30 

11.2 

6.3 

$40 naxiaua for raeipianta naadinf aadieal eara 

lo aaxiaua 


... 


lo aaxiauB 


... 


30 

.9 

... 


40 

4.2 

... 


40 

2.5 

... 


40 

4.0 

... 


40 

8.0 

... 


40 

?•' 


$30 aaziaua par raelpiant if 2 in faaily 

40 

4.2 

( 2 ! 

Ri^ar pa^Fuanta paraittad in iaataneaa of azeaptional naad 

20 

3.7 

..* 

a 

30 

2 .< 



25 

3.5 

... 


30 

0 


Utahi $40 aaziaua if aadieal eara naadad: no aaziaua if 

30 

50.2 

5.0 

raelpiant eupporta la^l dapaadaata la houaahold 

30 

9.7 

... 

Total payaanta to huahand and vifa nay net azaaad $45 

20 

8.8 



40 

38.7 

.... 

$34 aaziaua par raelpiant if 2 in faaily 

40 

2.4 

... 

♦ 

40 

5.5 

... 


40 

J 

5.1 

... 



y Ixeludaa aaounta owar the aaxiaoaa for a faw papaanta in Alahaaa* Miaaiaaippl* and PannalTTania haeanoa not char^ahla to old-a^e aaalatanca. 
y Dnaa than 0.0^ percant* 







































































sut* 


Voisl, 


TotAl, 37 SUtM 
viih BaziaoBt...* 


Alabama.. 

Arltoaa. 

Arkanaaa.... 

California. 

Colorado*.***.. 

ConBoetloBt.. 

Dlalriet of Coluibia*.** 

Tlorlda. 

Coor^la. 

Ha>fail. 

Idaho *. 

Indiana.*. .... 

Iowa. 

Eantat*.. 

Loui alana... 

Halna. 

Mar/laad. 

Maaoaehuaotta. 

Nlchlfan. 

Mlnnoaota*.... 

Kiaaiosippl. 

Montana... 

lobraoka*.**.. 

Vow Hanpahlro*•*.. 

Vow Joroo/. 

Vow Nozloo. 

Vow .. 

Vortb Carolina. 

Vorth Sakota. 

Ohio. 

OklahoBa. 

Orofon... 

Bhodo Inland.. 

South Carolina. 

South Dakota. 

Tonnooooo. 

.. 

Utah. 

Tomont.. .. 

Tirglaia. 

Vaohlnuton. 

foot Tlrclnla. 

.. 

VjOBla#. 


Tahlo 3***did to tho bllndt PajBOBto Ib rolatlon to Stato bbzIbbbo, Vowoabor 19HB 



Poroont 


BazlBQB 

At uonal 

AboTO nonal 

Xze^tiono to uoual BazlBoa 


BazlBoa 

BaZiBUB 


— 

19.2 

0.3 


* 

22.Z 

.3 


$40 

.2 



40 

49.0 

— 


30 

3.1 

— 



69.7 

— 


ko 

40*S 



40 

8>*.3 



40 

2>*.7 

... 


40 

.3 




3.1 



kO 

1.3 

— 


40 

20.7 


Indiana: PaTBonto may excoed $U0 in aaount nocotaary to 

40 

8.4 

.4 

include medical aaaistance 

40 

i6,9 



Vo BazlBUB 

— 

— 


Vo aazlBua 

—- 



30 

27.8 

... 

$40 BazlBUB for roolpionta noodinc Bodleal earn 

30 

28.2 

2.8 

44.1 



io 

10.4 



Vo aaziBQB 

“ 

—- 


30 

.8 



30 

16.9 

21.3 

$40 BazlBUB for roolpionta noodlnv Bodloal ears 

30 

35 

lU.« 


$40 BaziauB for roelplants noedlnc OBorconoy Bodleal earo 

.3 

7.4 

40 

4.7 



Vo BaxlBUB 


— 


Vo BazlBUB 

— 

— 


30 

6.0 



40 

4.4 



40 

4.2 

—- 


40 

16.2 



Vo aaziaraB 

•— 


Hi^er payBonto pomittod la Inotaneoa of ozeoptional nood 

30 

13.5 

14,6 

25 

1.8 

-— 


30 

5.0 

“ 


25 

6.0 

— 


30 

24.6 

••• 


Vo BaziaoB 

— 

— 


30 

37.2 



30 

3.0 



40 

58.0 



40 

30 

11.1 

40.7 

.9 

$40 BazlBUB for roolpionta both blind and doaf 

50 

3.1 


1--- 



































































- P6 - 


Many States prescribe a maximum payment for families receiving aid for 
only one dependent cHlld and a smaller uniform amount for maximum Increases 
In payments for each additional child aided. Of the 28 States with some type 
of maximum for aid to dependent children In November 19^2, 17 limited pay¬ 
ments for the first child to $l8 per month even though the payments In a 
one-child family often must provide for expenses of maintaining the home and 
for the requirements of the mother or other supervising adult. Maxlmums for 
the first child In the other States ranged from $10 In Mississippi to $56,95 
In the counties In which prices were highest In Pennsylvania. Maxlmums for 
each additional child ranged from $6 In the District of Columbia to $15 In 
Minnesota, In the District of Columbia and Pennsylvania, however, a higher 
maximum was provided for families In which two parents were In the home. 

Five States limit the application of the Increases In payments for the 
largest families by prescribing a family maximum. This was set at $65 In 
North Carolina, $60 in the District of Columbia and Missouri, $30 in 
Arkansas, and $24 in Texas (table 6). The District of Columbia was the only 
Jurisdiction with maxlmums for both old-age assistance and aid to dependent 
children which permitted as large a payment to a mother and one child as to 
one aged person. 

Arbitrary limits for payments of old-age assistance and aid to the 
blind cut off the range of payments and often result in the accumulation of 
many payments at the highest amount permitted. Assistance patterns for aid 
to dependent children In most of the States with maxlmums show very marked 
clustering of payments at the several maxlmums for families with specified 
numbers of children. 

The fact that a State places a maximum on payments Is not In itself 
evidence that such a raaxlinum restricts payments significantly. The number 
of recipients affected by maxlmums depends on the extent of Individual 
need In a State, the amoimts of the maxlmums, the ability and willingness 
of the State and local agencies to provide payments up to the prescribed 
limits, and on legal provisions discussed In the following section. 

Because maxlmums are generally higher for old-age assistance and aid to the 
blind than for aid to dependent children, they affect smaller proportions 
of payments In most States. Although most States had a maximum and some 
had. In addition, a higher maximum for recipients with exceptional needs, 
only about one-tenth of all payments'of old-age assistance In the 
United States and only one-fifth of those for aid to the blind were at 
either maximum. In contrast, more than 28 percent of the payments of aid 
to dependent children in the 46 States for which information is available 
were at the prescribed limits, even though only 27 of these States had 

limits. In 26 of these 27 States, 45 percent of the payments for aid 
to dependent children were at maximum amounts, 14/ 

In aid to dependent children, payments at the maximum are most com¬ 
mon for families with only one or two eligible children, and least common 
for the largest families. Families with one or two children, however, 

W ^ 

Texas made no payments at maximum amounts In November because of a $10 
cut In payments. In the following month more than 98 percent of all 
payments were at maximum amoiints. 



27 - 


T«bl« 6.--Aid to dependant children: PaTBante In relation to State naxlBnaa, hoTenher 19^ 


State 


Total, U6 States 

Total, 27 States with 
Baxlnnas ^ . 


AlabeMa. 

Arisona*... 

Arkansas ^ . 

California..*. 

Colorado.. 

Connoetieat*........... 

Delaware... 

District of Colunbia ^ 

Tlorlda*.... 

Georgia*.... 

Hawaii.. 

Idaho. 

Illinois. 

Indiana Jj . 

Kansas.. 

Louisiana.. 

• •• • ••eeeeeeaeae 

Marjland. 

Msissachasetts.. 

Michigan 9/. 

Minnesota. 

Miseisslppl..... 

Missouri.. 

Montana*............... 

Vebraska . 

low Hainshlre.......... 

lew Jerser ^ . 

lew Mexico..... 

lew Tork.... 

lorth Carolina.. 

lorth Dakota........... 

Ohio. 

Oklahoaeu. 

Oregon.. 

PennsxlTanla.. 

Bhode Island*.. 

South Carolina.. 

South Dakota 11 / .. 

Tennessee. 

Texas. 

Utah..... 

Tenont*.... 

Tirginia*..... 

Washington. 

West Tirginia 4/*. 

Wisconsin uy.. 

Ifoalng.... 


State maxlmuas 

?6rc«nt 

ftt 

First child 

Sach additional 
child 

Family 

maxiana 

— 

— 

— 

28.6 

— 

— 

— 

45.0 


Ho maxlmums 3/ 



$18 

$12 

1 — 

68*1 

IS 

12 

$30 

2.3 


Ho maxlmums 5/ 


as—. 

18 

12 


68.3 


Ho aaxlanas 


— 


Ho maxlmuas 


— 

30 

6 

60 

78.4 

18 

12 


4l*9 

18 

12 

— 

30.6 


Ho maxlmums 


— 

18 

12 


80.0 

18 

12 


93.4 

20 

( 8 ) 

— 

56.6 


Ho maxlmums 


— 


Ho maxlmuas 


— 


Ho maxlmuas 


— 

18 

12 

-— 

62.9 


Ho maxlmuas 


— 

28 

( 10 ) 

— 

38*7 

20 

15 

•a*.. 

66.7 

10 

7.50 


82*0 

18 

12 

60 

77.2 

18 

12 

-- 

63.3 

18 

12 

— 

»5.0 


Ho maxlmums 


— 


Ho maxlmuas 


— 


Ho maxlmuas 


— 


Ho maximnas 


— 

18 

12 

65 

10*0 

30 

12 


7*3 


Ho maxlmuas 


— 

18 

12 

“ 

12.0 


Ho maximume 


-- 

(12) 

( 12 ) 


(2) 


Ho maximnas 


-- 

15 

10 

.a- 

10.1 

18 

12 

— 

48,7 

12 

8 


55.4 

16 

8 

24 

0 


Ho maxlmums 


— 

17.33 

(13) 

— 

67.3 

18 

12 


15.5 


Ho maxlmuas 


— 

18 

12 1 

— 

38*5 


Ho maximum 



18 

” .J 


72*9 


^ Ixcludes aaovmts oTor the maxlauBs for a few paTaents in Georgia and South Carolina because not 
chargeable to aid to dependent children. 

2/ Nuaber of payaents at DaxlauBs in PennsylTania not awallable. 

V Wo maiimuns prescribed but State participates In paynents only to aaount of Tederal matching maxlnrams, 

^ Data are for October 1942. 

5/ Ho maxlnums prescribed but State participates In payaents only to $?1.5P for the first child, and $ 28.00 
for each additional child. 

^ Maxlnmms stated In terms of number of persons. Maximum for one-child family $3® if for throe persons. 
Data are for October 1942. 

jJ Payments may exceed maxlmuas In amount necessary to include medical assistance. 

g/ Second child,$18; each additional child, $12. 

1/ Hi^er maxlmums authorised In October did not affect NoTomber payments. Ho maxlmums In Wayns County. 

10/ Kaxlsmm additional amounts for successlTo children after first: $6, $11, $10, $12, $11, and $12 for 
each additional child. 

VU Data are for September 1942. 

\^l state agency prescribes maxlmuas for families of different sice in each of 15 groups of counties 
classified by cost of llwing. Hange for •two-person* families, $29.35 $36.95. 

^ Second child, $12.67; ‘ech additional child, $12. 










































































- 28 - 


represented more than three-fifths of all families receiving aid to depend¬ 
ent children in the United States, More than nine-tenths of the one-child 
families received maxlinum payments in Arizona, Illinois, and Wyoming in 
November 19^2. Although maximums for old-age assistance constitute a 
serious bar to meeting the need of some recipients, the proportion of pay¬ 
ments affected in the Nation is relatively small. In aid to the blind, 
maximums create a somewhat greater problem, and in aid to dependent chil¬ 
dren they restrict payments seriously in many States. 

Evidence of the inadequaoles of maximum payments of aid to depend¬ 
ent children is supplied by sample studies made by the State agencies in 
Nebraska and Minnesota, which show the difference between payments £uid the 
amounts of established need in the families receiving maximum payments in 
a month late in 19^2. In this month six-sevenths of all families aided in 
Nebraska and two-thirds of all families aided in Minnesota received maxi¬ 
mum amounts. The maximums in Nebraska were identical with the maximums for 
Federal matching; those in Minnesota were $20 and $15, higher than the 
Federal maximums by $2 for one-child families and higher by $5 for each 
additional child. Maximum payments were found to be too small to meet 
need 6ie established by the agency for more than 88 percent of the families 
receiving these amoimts in Nebraska and for more than 85 percent of such 
families in Minnesota. The average amount of need not met by the maximum 
payments in the families for whom such payments were insufficient was 
nearly $l8 in Nebraska and nearly $15 in Minnesota. The proportion of 
to'cri need cut off by maximum payments was noticeably larger in one-child 
f-imllies than in other families in both States. In Minnesota the average 
amount of unmet need in one-child families was $ 19.80 in the urban areas 
of the sample, and $11,10 in the rural areas. The average assistance 
needed and received by the families in which maximum payments failed to 
meet established need and the percent of need met by these payments were 
as follows for the families with one to four children in the samples 


studied I 

Neb 

r a s k a 


M i 

n n e s c 

5 t a 

Number of 

Average 


Percent 

Average 


Percent 

eligible 

amount of 

Amount 

of need 

amount of 

Amount 

of need 

children 

need estab¬ 

of 

met by 

need estab¬ 

of 

met by 

in family 

lished 

payment 

payment 

lished 

payment 

payment 

1- 

- $ 53.96 

$ 18.00 

53.0 

$ 33.92 

$20.00 

59.0 

2- 

- **7.30 

30.00 

63.4 

51.40 

35.00 

68.1 

3- 

- 61.10 

42.00 

68.6 

66.50 

50.00 

75.2 

4- 

- 7k M 

54.00 

72.1 

81.00 

65.00 

80.2 

It 

is apjjarent that maximums 

1 for aid to dependent 

children 

often 


preclude adequate provision for the needs of the supervising adult and for 
maintaining the home. Such requirements are a major part of total need in 
a one-child family but a smaller proportion in larger families where house¬ 
hold expenses are spread over a larger number of children. In 19^5 the 
legislature partly remedied the situation in Minnesota by Increasing the 
maximum for the first child in a family from $20 to $ 25 , 















- 29 - 


Majclmume for any type of aseietance preclude payments commensurate 
with need for recipients with unusxial requirements and with least oppor¬ 
tunity to meet their requirements through other resources. Experience has J 
convinced many agencies and State legislatures that more flexible provi- 1 
' slons are necessary, particularly If recipients are to he enabled to pay for 
medical services. Maxlmiims have been raised in many States, deleted in 
some, and adjusted In others. Adjustments In maximum payments commonly pro¬ 
vide a higher maximum or none at all for cases of exceptional need. Some 
type of adjustment of the maximum was permitted for old-age assistance in 
eight States, for aid to the blind In six States, and for aid to dependent 
children in one State (Indiana) in November (tables 4-6) 

Many States have recognized the Impossibility of meeting the need of 
families under maximums prescribed in terms of the number of eligible chil¬ 
dren. In'‘November 1942, 19 States Imposed no limits for payments of aid to 
dependent children; 2 of these States (Alabama and Cslifomia) limited the 
amounts that the State would match but encoiiraged counties to make payments 
to meet total need. The Inflexibility of maximums prevents Increases In 
the payments already at these limits when the need of the recipient 
Increases. The relatively small increase in median payments for aid to 
dependent children from November 1940 to November 1942 Is explained in part 
by the fact that so many 1940 payments were at highest amounts permitted. 
Legally Defined Levels of Living 

Instead of limiting payments by prescribing maximums, legislatures In 
I six States have attempted to guarantee a specific amount of total Income to 
I all recipients of old-age assistance and .sometimes of aid to the blind. 

These States are Cellfomla, Colorado, Massachusetts, Nevada, Utah, and 
Vashlngton. Two distinct methods of computation are used to achieve this 
I result. One Is to provide a precise total which the sum of assistance and 
other Income must meet; the other, to provide a minimum amount below which 
the sum of assistance and other Income must not fall. This underwriting of 
specific amounts of Income plus assistance explains the high level of pay¬ 
ments of old-age assistance and aid to the blind in these six States (charts 
j 4 and 5). 

The amounts prescribed and the specific provisions varied in these 
States and resiilted In quite different patterns of assistance in November 
1942. For old-age assistance, Colorado prescribed that Income plus assist¬ 
ance should be $45 for all recipients. Washington set this total at $40; 
Nevada, at not less than $50 and not more than $40. California and Utah set 
^0 and $30, respectively, but provided for certain exceptions. At least 
$40 In Income plus aseietance was guaranteed to all recipients in 
California, but Income plus assistance could exceed this amount for recip¬ 
ients with requirements In excess of $40 who also had Income other than 
as si stance. 15/ At least $50 In income plus assistance was guaranteed to all 
recipients In Utah, but recipients with certain types of larger requirements 


California also initiated a plan In November 1942 under which recipients 
could elect to have their payments determined by the budget-deficit 
method. Payments to some 5,000 recipients, 5 percent of the case load, 
were so determined in this month. 










- 30 - 


were not limited to this amount (table ^4-), Massachusetts was the only one oT 
these States to prescribe no maximum for any aged recipient. This State pro¬ 
vided a minimum of in Income plus eissistance for each recipient living 
alone and $30 for those living in family groups, of more than two per sons. 16/ 
Requirements greater than these amounts are recognized and, when not met by 
other resources, are met by assistance. 

Provisions for aid to the blind in California and Washington were 
similar to the provisions for old-age assistance in these States, but 
California prescribed $50 in income plus assistance for the blind. 

Uniform amounts for income plus assistance assume that the require¬ 
ments of all recipients are equal in amount. In the States with such provi¬ 
sions, the income of individual recipients is determined, but individual 
requirements are not usually determined. Total income for some recipients 
with low requirements, therefore, may be larger than it would be if actual 
need were determined. On the other hand, uniform'totals for Income plus 
assistance make it Impossible to meet the need of recipients with excep¬ 
tionally large requirements just as do other types of maximums.Thle difficulty 
was met for some, but not for all, recipients by the exceptions to the 
uniform amounts for income plus assistance provided in California and Utah 
(tables 4 and 5) > 17/ 

In the six States under discussion, the method of determining payments 
as a total of income plus assistance tends to make more payments cluster at 
the prescribed amounts than at the maximums in States prescribing other types 
of limits. In California, nearly 64 percent of the payments for old-age . 
assistance were at $40 in November, and nearly 70 percent of payments of aid 
to the blind were at $50. In Washington, about 39 percent of payments of 
old-age assistance and 58 percent of those for aid to the blind were at $40. 
Half the payments for old-age assistance in Utah were at $30. In Colorado, 
the yield of taxes earmarked for old-age assistance has been Inadequate in 
most months to provide the specified total of $45 for Income plus assistance. 
Fluctuations in these revenues require^varying deductions from this total 
from month to month. In November 1942 the deduction was $1, and 46.5 percent 
of the payments were at $44. In Nevada, where the total for income plus 
assistance could vary from $30 to $40 according to individual circumstances, 
about 13 percent of the payments were at $30 and more than 60 percent were 
higher. The absence of any State maximums in Massachusetts permits flexi¬ 
bility in meeting unusual need and in adjusting for rising living costs. 

Some of the local unitd, however, prescribe maximums. In this State, 30 per¬ 
cent of the assistance payments, excluding the additional payments made 
because of medical or other exceptional needs were at the $40 set as a mini¬ 
mum for Income plus assistance, and 9 percent were more than $4o. 

W ^ 

$65 for a man and wife alone, $50 if they lived in a larger household 
group, 
ii/ 

After November 1942, Washington provided for determining payments on the 
basis of individual requirements and resources within the limitation of 
the $40 State maximum. 






- 51 - 


The six States with legislative guarantees of specific amounts In 
Income plus assistance were among the 10 States with the highest payments 
for old-age assistance In November 1942.3^ Four of these six States — 
those which did not limit their payments for aid to dependent children by 
maxlmums (California, Massachusetts, Utah, and Washington) also ranked 
among the ten States with highest levels of payments for aid to dependent 
children. These States relied on administrative standards and procedures, 
rather than on a specific legislative guarantee, for determining the 
amounts of payments In the latter program. The provision of a reasonably 
high level of living for recipients of assistance does not necessarily 
depend, therefore, on legislative guarantees of a specific amount of 
Income. It can be achieved by appropriate standards and procedures. If 
sufficient funds are available and payments are not limited arbitrarily. 


Inadequacy of State Funds 

Another factor responsible for some of the lack of conformity 
between assistance and need patterns is that the funds of some State 
agencies are sufficient to make payments only at the level described as 
the lower In the accompanying charts. The Insufficiency of the funds may 
result from the failure of the State legislature to provide adequate funds 
or may be due to the low fiscal, capacity of the State, 


The extent to which limited State fiscal capacity Is responsible for 
Insufficient assistance funds is difficult to establish. It can be shown, 
however, that nearly all the States making payments at the lower level 
(charts 4-6) are States that rank low in fiscal capacity. To Indicate 
relative flscaJL capacity, per capita income of the States is used as an 
Index. In 1942, per capita Income for the United States was $ 852 . Per 
capita income In the lowest third of the States, ranked according to amount 
of such Income, Is shown below: 


Vermont ----- $698 North Carolina - - $525 

Virginia- 697 Arkansas-514 

Texas ------ 677 Georgia ----- 498 

Florida ----- 655 Tennessee - - - - 492 

niri whorrift _ - - - 598 Alabama ----- 480 

West Virginia - - 598 Kentucky-477 

New Mexico- 558 South Carolina - - 459 

Louisiana - - - - 554 Mississippi - - - 407 


Only three States that made lower-level payments In November 1942 in one or 
more programs fail to appear among this group of States with low fiscal 
capacity; these States are Delaware, Missouri, 19/ and South Dakota. On the 
other hand, three States In the low per capita Income group made payments 
at a higher level for all programs—Vermont, West Virginia, and New Mexico. 


W 

i 2 / 


As measured by the median payment (chart 1). 


Level based on payments made In November 1942, If retroactive payments 
made In December 1942 had been Included, Missouri would have been shown 
as making payments for old-age assistance at the middle level. 


















- 32 - 


In general, therefore, the States that made low payments are those with the 
lowest per capita indome. This finding is in a^eement with other studies 
of the relationship "between average payments and per capita income. 

While a relationship "between the size of payments and fiscal capac¬ 
ity is not conclusive proof that fiscal capacity determines the level of • 
payments, it is unlikely that this relationship is due to chance. Other 
factors, however, often combine to offset this effect of limited fiscal 
capacity. Important among these other factors are the measure of fiscal 
effort exerted to provide adequate funds and the choice between accepting 
many applicants for low payments or restricting the case load in order to 
give higher payments. 

States with insufficient funds have adopted a variety of methods 
for limiting individual payments in order to keep within available fimds. 

Some State legislatures have accomplished this end by eetsblishlng espe¬ 
cially low maximums on individual payments. In other States the method 
is left to the administrative agency. Some agencies set administrative 
maximums. Others limit payments by excluding from standards for require¬ 
ments some of the needs of recipients that are considered in other States, 
or restrict the amounts that can be Included for specific requirements. 

Still other States determine the amount of assistance needed on the basis 
of reasonably comprehensive requirements but restrict the payment to a 
specified proportion of the established need. Still another method is to 
make a uniform reduction in payments. One or more of these methods of- 
reducing assistance when funds are Insufficient to meet need was in opera¬ 
tion in all the State programs under which payments were lowest. Similar 
practices were in effect also in some of the other States, although, in 
general, they resulted in l^ss drastic reductions in assistance. 

Federal Matching Provisions 

Even though Federal financial participation has resulted in generally 
higher payments in the States which had programs for assisting the needy- 
aged, blind, and dependent children before the peissage of the Social Security 
Act, nevertheless the provisions for Federal matching are partly responsible 
for much of the Inadequacy of current payments. The act, as amended in 1939# 
provides that the Federal Government shall pay one-half of the payments made 
in conformity with the act up to a total of $40 per month for old-age 
assistance and aid to the blind, and to a total of $l8 for the first child 
and $12 for each additional child for aid to dependent children. Both the 
equal-matching provision and the maximum amounts that may be matched by -the 
Federal Government have tended to limit the amounts of payments. 

Although the matching maximums do not limit the payments States may 
make, they have had a marked Influence on the amounts set as State maximums, 
as is evident from the frequency of these amounts among State maximums shown 
in tables 4-6, Even in States with higher maximums or no maximums, payments 
are sometimes restricted to the amounts for which Federal matching is avsdl- 
able. About 9 percent of all payments of old-age assistance, about 5*5 
percent of those for aid to the blind, and about 20 percent of -those for aid 
to dependent children in November 1942 were at the maximums for Federal 
matching (charts 9-11). More than one-third of the payments for aid to 
dependent children in 15 States and more than two-thirds in 7 States were at 
these limits. 





- 33 


CHAf^T 9 

OLD-AGE ASSISTANCE: PAYMENTS IN RELATION TO 
FEDERAL MATCHING MAXIMUM, NOV. I942t 

PERCENT 

0 20 40 60 80 100 

51 

STATES 
CALIF. 

ARIZ. 

COLO. 

MASS. 

WASH. 

ALASKA 
CONN. 

IDAHO 
ILL. 

NEV. 

N.Y. 

OREG. 

KANS. 

N.H. 

WIS. 

MONT. 

WYO. 

R. l. 

N.DAK. 

OKLA. 

N.MEX. 

PA. 

UTAH 
OHIO 
W.VA. 

N.J. 

IND. 

HAWAII 
MICH. 

MD. 

LA. 

ALA. 

FLA. 

ARK. 

DEL. 

D.C. 

GA. 

IOWA 

KY. 

MAINE 
MINN. 

MISS. 

MO. 

NEBR. 

N.C. 

S. C. 

S. DAK. 

TENN. 

TEXAS 
VT. 

VA. 



LESS THAN $40.00 


$40.00-40.99 


$41.00 a OVER 


fSEE FOOTNOTES, TABLE /. 































































































- 34 - 


CHART 10 

AID TO THE BLIND: PAYMENTS IN RELATION TO 
FEDERAL MATCHING MAXIMUM, NOV. 1942 + 


PERCENT 


44 

STATES 

CALIF. 

WASH. 

ARIZ, 

COLO. 

D.C. 

CONN. 

IDAHO 

OREG. 

IOWA 

UTAH 

OKLA. 

WYO. 

N.Y. 

MONT. 

N.MEX. 

W.VA. 

KANS. 

MINN. 

MICH. 

IND. 

R. l. 

N.J. 

N.DAK. 

N.H. 

OHIO 

LA. 

HAWAII 

MD. 

WIS. 

FLA. 

ALA. 

ARK. 

GA. . 

MAINE 

MASS. 

MISS. 

NEBR. 

N.C. 

S. C. 
S.DAK. 
TENN. 
TEXAS 
VT. 

VA. 



LESS THAN $40.00 Om] $40.00-40.99 
fSEE FOOTNOTES, TABLE 2. 


$41.00, a OVER 

















































































































35 


CHART I I 


AID TO DEPENDENT CHILDREN: PAYMENTS IN 
RELATION TO FEDERAL MATCHING MAXIMUMS, 
NOV. I942t 


PERCENT 


0 20 40 60 80 100 


47 

STATES 

ILL. 

MASS. 

CALIF. 

N.Y. 

NEBR. 

OR EG. 
WASH. 

' CONN. 

R. l. 
MICH. 
IDAHO 
N.H. 
MINN. 
WYO. 

MO. 

IND. 

UTAH 

WIS. 

COLO. 

ARI2. 

PA. 

MAINE 

MONT. 

MD. 

KANS. 

OHIO 

DEL. 

D.C. 

N.J. 

: N.DAK. 

HAWAII 

I S.DAK. 

VT. 

FLA. 

N.MEX. 

W.VA. 

LA. 

GA. 

VA. 

OKLA. 

N.C. 

ALA. 

ARK. 

MISS. 

S. C. 
TENN. 
TEXAS 



LESS THAN FEDEkAL MAXIMUMS 
SAME AS FEDERAL MAXIMUMS 
MORE THAN FEDERAL MAXIMUMS 


'^S£E FOOTNOTES, TABLE 3 














































































































- 36 - 


The Inadequacy of payments at the Federal majclimimfi is reflec-^d in 
the fact that some States found It necessary to make payments from State 
and local funds in excess of these maxlmums. Eleven States made some 
payments to the aged, and the same number some payments to the blind, in 
excess of Federal maxinrums. TVenty-five States made such payments for aid 
to dependent children. In these States nearly .two-third of the payments 
exceeded the Federeil matching limits in contrast to only one-tenth of the 
payments for the aged in those States which made payments in excess of $40, 
California’s $50 payments largely account for the 38 percent of the pay¬ 
ments of aid to the blind in excess of the Federal maximums in the States 
that made such payments. Federal Tnaxintums were exceeded in 73 percent of 
all payments to one-child families in the States that do not limit assist¬ 
ance to the Federal matching maximums (chert 12). Progressively smaller 

chart 12 

AID TO DEPENDENT CHILDREN: PAYMENTS IN 
RELATION TO FEDERAL MATCHING MAXIMUMS,BY 
NUMBER OF CHILDREN, FOR ALL STATES, NOV. I942t 

PERCENT 



B8888 LESS THAN FEDERAL MAXIMUMS 
SAME AS FEDERAL MAXIMUMS 

[v:v:v:i more than federal maximums 


'/'SEE FOOTNOTES, TABLE 3. 










































































- 37 - 


proportions of payments above the Federal maximums for families with 
■ore than one eligible child are explained, in part, by the greater 
adequacy of the Federal maximums for the larger families* 20/ They 
are also due in part to the inabilily or unwillingness of some States 
to make payments for the larger families in the full amount for which 
Federal matching is available. In the second half of 1942, the Federal 
Government contributed 99 cents for each dollar spent by State and local 
units for old-age assistance in all States, 92 cents for each dollar spent 
for aid to the blind, and only 67 cents for aid to dependent children. The 
relatively small Federal share for aid to dependent children indicates the 
extent to which some States have met need in excess of the Federal matching 
maximums. 

Under an equal-matching percentage the Federal Government cannot 
contribute more, although it maj contribute less, than the State is both 
willing and able to provide. In November 1942 the Federal Government con¬ 
tributed less than $10 per recipient for each of the three types of assist¬ 
ance in Alabama, Arkansas, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Tennessee, 
but more than $15 per recipient of each type in Arizona, California, 
Colorado, and Washington. In general. Federal expenditures per recipient 
were lowest in the States that were least able to finance adequate assist* 
ance. For example, in only 2 of the 15 States with high per capita income 
did the Federal contribution to payments of old-age assistance average less 
than $10 per recipient. In only 1 of the 16 States with the lowest per 
capita income was the Federal share as much as $10 (table 7)* 


2o7 

The New Mexico State agenqr estimated that 72 percent of all families 
receiving aid to dependent children in November 1941 needed more than 
the maximums for Federal matching. The proportions for different 
numbers of eligible children were: 


Number of 
children aided 


Percent needing more 
than Federal maximum 


1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 


7 and over 


91 

83 

72 

60 

50 

40 

16 







Table 7,—Old-age assistance: Estlaiated Federal contribution to average payments in November 1942 
State, classified according to per capita income 


- 38 - 





x; 

4-> 


00 

a> 

■8 

& 


e 

O O 


U O 
9 

O -P 

rH ^ 

& 

O 


'3 

<D 

*0 

r® 

1*4 


+> 

a 

"S 

o 

o 


i 

o 

•p 


g o 

& ^ 

« o 

P4 




05 


■p 

•p 


•H 

o5 

•P 



%H 

•H 



•d 


S 

a 

S 

aS 

0 

o 

■p 

e 

o 

o 

o 


0 ) q) ^ d 

S'" 



•p 




O *3) 05 


&S 


■P -H +> 

05 XJ •H 

S’ 

O 




VOOOCJOOOOVOOOOOOCUONh-r-lt^rHCVJ 
0^ CVJ OmH ^ tOv-iJ- OOJiHlPviHCOt^Oirs 

00 ITNOn t-*CO O On r- lf\vo ^ ^ 

iH 


1 1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

I 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

o5 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

05 

1 

1 1 

1 

1 

c5 

1 

1 

1 

3 

1 

1 

1 

1 

I 

d 

1 




•H 




«H 






•H 


1 1 

1 

1 

d 

1 


1 

rH 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

rH 

•H 






o 


O 






O 

Pi 

1 

o5 

1 

1 

(30 


O 

o5 

h 


1 

o 

1 


H 

Pi 



Pi 

d 

•H 

d 

3 

CQ 

od 

o 


S3 

3 

o 

•H 

a ri 

1 

CQ 


S 


3 

o 

o5 

00 


CO 


(30 


<D •H CD <H CQ 

:e: CO ^ g t)0 o 
-P S 5h 
I 4 M 


o m 

pj rd «H 
4-> +> ffl 


B irR >3^1 S S'§^ 3 S 

^^S^SSS2SMSS^SSS 


H VO O ^ JTNVO CO O CVJ -:t VO OJ K>C0 VO H 0\ 
rOv ir\ (O On OnOO O 0-4- 

CVJ |0\ r^ ^r^00 OOHOCVJCOO(7NrHK\(JsONrH 
rH rH rH rH rH rH rH rH rH ^ rH rH rH rH rH 

-W- 


I I I 
I I I 

05 I I 

I ■ ■ 

'Sg’l 

s^al 


I I 
I I 
I I 
I I 


s 


I I I I I I I I I I 

I I I I I I I I I 

o 

I I I I I i i 05 cd Pi 

•P H-» vj 

I III I O O ;cd 
cj ai ^ ^ <0 

01 S'S'S^S 

05QOp405ooO.i::3;aM 


M<H05CQi:iOOPl 

COC0)<H'O>(i*HC0rH,O«»^«,^rn»> 


CD d ,q H-> 4j 

ca 3 d d Pi > 


VOVOO(M-4-COCVJOt^lfN KNOO -4- IPv 
VOVO CMTNKM^t^CVJ OnCVJ^ tOvr^iri-4- 

ITN rH -4- VO 00 VO ir\^ (7 n CVJ VO CU lO\ O K\ 
rH rH rH rH rH rH rH ^ rH iH rH rH rH 

-ee- 


I 

I 

I 

o5 


CD 

■P 

i s 

CO 



d CO CO d 

J4 M ^ 3 
y o (30 

o a> d *H 
>> (30 CO '6 >H A o 
rHrHa)CO;»5U<»COOrHO«H 

g s s a <5 5 a li I s I s u a g 



























- 59 - 


Supplementary AEsletance 

The variation in payments under the special types of public as'dist¬ 
ance does not reflect accurately the variation in the total assistance 
' available to the persons who receive these payments. The categorical 
approach to assistance has resulted in a division of public responsibility 
for needy people among various funds and often among different agencies* 

The part each plays and the adequacy of the total assistance received by 
needy individuals and families differ from State to State and community to 
i community. 

The variety of plans for meeting the requirements of recipients of 
assistance is illustrated by the numerous arrangements for medic€il aid. Many 
j agencies administering the special types of public assistance include small 
; amounts for predictable health needs among the requirements of recipients. 

! Some agencies also provide for emergency medical care by increasing payments 
i when the need arises. Such Increases are often distributed over several 
j months to avoid exceeding the State maximums or the Federal matching limits. 

' Instead of meeting medical needs through payments to recipients, a few States 
|i permit agencies to make payments directly to physicians and hospitals from 
I appropriations for the special types of public assistance. In the Jurlsdlc- 
; tlons which have no provisions for financing medical assistance throtigh such 
I funds, recipients must depend upon other uneven provisions in their respec¬ 
tive communities. In many States, most of the cost of medical services 
received by recipients is financed from general assistance funds. 

Sometimes Inadequate payments for old-age assistance, aid to dependent 
children, and aid to the blind are eked out by simultaneous payments of 
genered assistance. Such supplementary payments may be made, for example, to 
families whose aid for dependent children is limited by the maximum, or may 
be made to other members of the families of aged or blind recipients. 

General asslLtance, however, is not avedlable in all c omm u n ities and is 
extremely limited in many other communities. In more than one-fouj^h of the 
States, local governmental units carry full financial responsibility for 
general assistance, and in nearly half the States local funds accounted for 
more than two-thirde of the expenditures for this program in 19^2, Fre¬ 
quently general assistance is not provided in many of the Jurisdictions that 
make the lowest payments for the special types of public assistance. 

The studies of families ixi Nebraska and Minnesota receiving maxim u m 
payments for aid to dependent children included an inquiry into the number 
receiving general assistance, Nebrax^a reported that about 7«5 percent of 
the families included in the study received such additional assistance in 
amounts averaging $10.20 a month per family. The Minnesota study found that 
in the urban counties studied approximately 55 percent of the need not met 
by aid to dependent children was met by genered assistance; in the rural 
counties, genersd assistance met only about 26 percent of such need. 





- 1^0 - 


In 11 of 15 other States for which Information is available,21/ lees 
than 5 percent of the families receiving aid to dependent children in 
September or October 19^2 also received general assistance. In South Dakota, 
Montana, Arizona, and Illinois, this percentage ranged from 8 to 39. 

Although the majority of families aided in these states had some cash Income 
other than public aid, half the families in Arkansas had less than $26 per 
month and half the faznilles in Missouri, less than $35 In total cash Income, 
including both assistance and other resources. Despite the exceptionally 
high living costs in the District of Columbia, the total cash Income of half 
the families receiving aid to dependent children was less than $57 pen month. 

Many recipients supplemented their assistance payments in November 
1942 through participation in the food stamp plan or in the plan for direct 
distribution of certedn commodities. These provisions, which were not to be 
considered in determining the amounts of assistance payments, made avail¬ 
able, under certain conditions, foods currently declared by the U.S. Depart¬ 
ment of Agriculture to be surplus fam products. Information for 40 States 
shows that in December 1942 more than half of all families receiving aid to 
dependent children in these States, but a considerably smaller proportion 
of recipients of old-age assistance and aid to the blind, received such food 
though one of these plans. The average value of the food received through 
free stamps was nearly $6 for recipients of old-age assistance, more then $7 
for recipients of aid to the blind, and more than $12 per family for recip¬ 
ients of aid to dependent children. By the end of 1942 some of the surplus 
foods available for purchase through the stamp plan were not available 
through direct distribution. 

In some Individual situations, provisions for additional assistance 
compensate for Inadequate payments made under the three special types of 
assistance. V/here the general level of such .payments is low, however, addi¬ 
tional assistance is not generally available. In spite of additional provi¬ 
sions for assistance in some places, payments frequently fall to meet the 
need of recipients. Often the problem of Inadequate assistance remains, 
despite piecemeal attempts on the part of States to meet need through two or 
even more programs. 


liirouj^ a study of the characteristics of the families receiving edd to 
dependent children. The 11 States are: Arkansas, District of Columbia, 
Kansas, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Missouri, North Carolina, Oklahoma, 
Utah. West Virginia, and Wisconsin. In Arkansas, District of Columbia, 
Oklahomn, and Uteih, less than 1 percent of the families in the aid to 
aepenoent children case load received both types of assistcmce. 









- 41 - 


Conclusion 


Since State programs for the special types of public assistance 
operate under varying laws, policies, and procedures, differences In pay¬ 
ments from State to State are Inevitable. It is Impossible to trace the 
Influence of ell differences In law or policy, but certain factors are 
obvious. 

Insufficiency of funds, resulting from either low fiscal capacity or 
lack of public support as expressed through appropriations, or a combina¬ 
tion of both. Is a basic cause of Inadequate payments. Insufficiency of 
funds frequently leads to the establishment of State maximums as a conven¬ 
ient administrative or legal device for controlling total expenditures. 
Behind the maximums in one State may lie the inability of the State to 
finance assistance at a hl^er level; in another State, the maximum may 
-reflect public attitudes toward assistance. The historical development of 
the programs also has Influence; the limits on the extent of Federal 
participation in the Social Security Act have served as a model which most 
States have followed by Incorporating similar limits In their own laws. 

Many of these States have found it difficult to depart from the precedent 
of maximums on payments, once established. 

The basis of Federal reimbursement to States for assistance payments 
established by the Social Security Act has also served indirectly to 
Influence the size of payments in that it disregards the relative fiscal 
capacities of the States. In effect, therefore, the amount of Federal funds 
made available to States for assistance is determined in relation not to the 
need of recipients but to the funds which the States are able and willing to 
provide for these programs. 

It is evident that both Federal and State factors have Influenced the 
general level of payments. Where payments have failed to meet need, the 
failure should be regarded not solely as the product of State operation but 
also as the effect of legislation, governing Federal participation. The pro¬ 
vision of special Federal aid to States with low fiscal capacity, which has 
been recommended by many different groups and organizations, and the elimi¬ 
nation of Federal matching maximums, especially for aid to dependent chil¬ 
dren, would go far toward overcoming the handicaps imposed by the Federal 
Act. These changes would enable the States to remove their m axim u ms and to 
give assistance more nearly in accord with the need of recipients. 







^ 

IWSi 

- 

.: ,iOsji to 


; CifftJ'cit 

i;'3'5^t5 
-’f Bbm: 

;.r' 

: !70*i<l 


i.'.'L^T.'ri 

-in ,oaL’’ 

•■rx rtOO:V 

noJU-a; 

.tv A 



Families Receiving 

Aid to Dependent Children 

October 1942 




Part /. Race, Size, and 
Composition of Families and 
Reasons for Dependency 


FEDERAL SECURITY AGENCY 
SOCIAL SECURITY BOARD 
Bureau of Public Assistance 



PUBLIC ASSISTANCE REPORT NO. 7 








Federal Security Agency 
SOCIAL SECURITY BOARD 


Arthur J, Altmeyer, Chairman 
George E. Bigge Ellen S. Woodward 

Oscar M. Powell, Executive Director 



BUREAU OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 
Jane M. Hoey, Director 




FAMILIES RECEIVING 


AID TO DEPENDENT CHILDREN 
OCTOBER 19U2 


part I. Race, Size, and Composition of Families, 
and Reasons for Dependency 


by 

Agnes Leisy 


Statistics and Analysis Division 
Biireau of Public Assistance 


Public Assistance Report No. 7 


Federal Security Agency 
SOCIAL SECURITY BOARD 
Washington, D. C. 





PORMORD 






Until July 19U2, State public assistance agencies were required to supply 
information annually to the Social Security Board on,the characteristics of 
recipients accepted for aid. These data were extremely valuable in the early 
years of the public assistance programs but, as the programs developed, infor¬ 
mation for only the new cases added to the rolls became increasingly less 
representative of the total case load and was inadequate for the intensive 
study of particular phases of public assistance administration. Consequently, 
it was decided to discontinue this series of reports and to substitute special 
studies representative of the entire case load, to be made by States from time 
to time on a voluntary basis. Wartime changes in the program for aid to 
dependent children and the need for more complete information about the char¬ 
acteristics of families receiving aid resulted in the selection of this 
program for the first of these special studies, which was made in the fall of 
19U2 in 16 States. 

Although the findings of the study summarized in this report are not in 
all respects representative of recipients of aid to dependent children in the 
United States as a whole, the study throws light on the extent to which the 
objectives of the program are being achieved in l6 States and reveals the 
effect on State programs of both Federal provisions and various State laws, 
policies, and practices. The findings will be useful to all States by suggest¬ 
ing certain changes in administrative practice that will improve and expand 
the program. The Bureau wishes to express its appreciation to the staff of 
the State and local public assistance agencies whose collection and con^jila- 
tion of the State data made this study possible. 


March 19U5 


Jane M. Hoey, Director 
Bureau of Public Assistance 


CONTENTS 


Page 

I. Introduction . ^ 

II. Racial Differences in Recipient Rates. 3 

III. Size and Coinposition of Families. 6 

Number of persons per family. .. 6 

Persons in addition to ADC unit. 6 

Other persons in household. 8 

Age of persons in family. 8 

Persons I 8 years and over. 9 

• Children under 18 years of age.. 9 

Distribution of families by number of children. 11 

IV. Children Not Approved for Aid. .. l5 

Children under I 6 years not approved. 15 

Children I 6 -I 7 years not approved . I 9 

V. Relatives With Y/hom Children Were Living. 21 

Relative to whom payment was made. 23 

VI. Reasons for Lack of Support or Care. 2$ 

Major^reasons . 2^ 

Lack of support or care by the father. 26 

Death of the father. 2? 

Absence of the father because of estrangement from family . . 28 

Diyorce and legal separation . 29 

Desertion or separation without court decree . 30 

Father not married to the mother. 31 

Incapacity of the father. 31 

Lack of support or care ty the father for reasons other than 

death, estrangement from family, and incapacity. 35 

Imprisoned.' . . .. 36 

Serving in armed forces.^. . . 36 

Absent for other reasons . 36 

Unemployed or with insufficient earnings . 37 

Incapacity in relation to absence. 37 

Lack of support or care by the mother. 37 

Needed in the home and unemployed or with insufficient 

earnings. 38 

Dead, incapacitated, or absent for other reason. iiO 

VII. Conclusions. 

Appendix. ^3 







































GH/IRTS 


Page 

I,—White and nonwrhite children receiving aid per 1,000 population 

under age 18, ADC families, for 16 States, October 19h2 . , . k 

II.—ADC fcunilies, by number of children, for 16 States, October 19U2 13 

III.—Children in specified age groups not approved for aid, ADC fami¬ 
lies, for 16 States, October 19U2. l6 

IV.—-White and nonwhite children under age l6 not approved for aid, 

ADC families, for l6 States, October 19h2 . 17 

V.—^Percent of children aged 16-1? not approved for aid, by school 

attendance status, ADC families, for 10 States, October 19U2. 19 

VI.—Relative with whom children receiving aid were living, ADC fami¬ 
lies, for 16 States, October 19^2. 22 

VII.—Relative receiving payment in ADC families with both parents in 

the home, for 16 States, October 19U2. 2U 

VIII.—^ADC families with widovfed mother per 100 families in population 
with children and widowed female head, for 16 States, Octo¬ 
ber 19U2. 28 

IX.—Fathers absent because of estrangement from family per 100 

fathers dead, ADC families, for l6 States, October 19U2 ... 29 

X.—Fathers absent because of estrangement from family per 100 

fathers dead, by type of esc.rangement, ADC families, for l6 
States, October 19U2.. 30 

XI.—Incapacitated fathers per 100 fathers dead, ADC families, for 16 

States October I 9 U 2 . *. 32 

• • 

XII.—^Reason for lack of support by the mother in ADC families with 

nonincapacitated mother in home, for I 6 States, October 19U2. 39 

XIII.—-ADC families dependent primarily because of lack of care by the 

mother, for I 6 States, October 19U2. I 4 .O 











APPENDIX lABLES 


Page 

Table 1.—Size of sample and month to vdiich data relate, study of 

aid to dependent children in l6 States, 19h2, by State . U; 

Racial Differences in Recipient Rates 

Table 2.—Race of population under age 18, for 16 States, I 9 U 0 

Census. )|]| 

Table 3*—Race of children approved for aid to dependent children, 

for 16 States, October 19^2. I 4.5 

Table U.—Children receiving aid to dependent children per 1,000 
population under age I 8 , by race, for I 6 States, Octo¬ 
ber 19 U 2 . 

Size and Composition of Families 

Table 5*—^Average number of persons, by aid status and age, ADC 

families, for I 6 States, October 19U2. U6 

Table 6.—^ADC families with persons of specified age, other than 
children approved for aid, parent(s) or relative in loco 
parentis, for I 6 States, October 19U2. U6 

Table 7.—^ADC families with brothers and sisters under age I 8 not 
approved for aid, by person with whom approved children 
were living, for I 6 States, October 19U2 . . '. hi 

Table 8.—ADC families with specified persons in household who 

were not members of the family, for I 6 States, October 

I 9 U 2 . U7 

Table 9.—^Age of persons in ADC families, for I 6 States, October 

I 9 U 2 . U8 

Table 10.—Sex and relationship to children approved for aid of 

persons I 8 years and over, ADC families, for I 6 States, 

October 19U2. 

Table 11.—Age of children under age I 8 , ADC families, for I 6 

States, October 19U2. h9 

Table 12.—ADC families, by number of children under I 8 years, for 
16 States, October 19U2. 

Table 13.—ADC families, by number of children under age I 8 , 

adjusted for differences among State populations in the 
number of children per family, for I 6 States, October 

19U2. 50 
















Appendix Tables, continued 


Page 

Children Not Approved for Aid 

Table lU.—ADC families, by number of children approved for aid, 

for l6 States, October 19U2. 50 

Table 1 $,—Children under 16 years not approved for aid, age 

group and race, ADC families, for 16 States, October 19U2 5l 

Relatives With Whom Children Were Living 

Table l6.—ADC families, by relative with whom children were living, 

for l6 States, October 19U2. 5l 

Table 17.—Parent to whom payment was made when both parents were 

in the home, ADC families, for 16 States, October 19U2 . 52 

Reasons for Lack of Support or Care 

Table 18.—ADC families with widowed mother per 100 families in 
population with children and widowed female head, for 
16 States, October 19i|.2. 52 

Table 19.—ADC families: Reasons for lack of support or care by the 

father and by the mother, l6 States, October 19U2. ... 53 

Table 20,—Children approved for ADC: Reasons for lack of support 
or care by the father and by the mother, l6 States, 

October 19ii2. 53 

Table 21.—ADC families ivith specified reason for lack of support 

or care by one and by both parents, for 16 States, Octo¬ 
ber :j.9U2. 5U 

Table 22.—^Reason for lack of support or care by the father, ADC 

families, for l6 States, October 19i;2. 55 

Table 23.—ADC families deprived of support or care by the father 
for specified reason per 100 ADC families with father 
dead, for l6 States,, October 19i4.2. 56 

Table 2U.—Reason for lack of support or care by the mother, ADC 

families, for 16 States, October 19l^ .. . . 57 

Table 25.—^Reason for lack of support or care by the mother, 

according to reason for lack of support or care by the 
father, ADC families, l6 States, October 19U2. 58 

Table 26.—^Reason for lack of support or care by the father, 
according to reason for lack of support or ca: 
mother, ADC families, l6 States, October 19U2 


58 















I, INTRODUCTION 


Children deprived of support or care because either the father or mother 
is dead, out of the home, or incapacitated, frequently need financial assist¬ 
ance to ensure for them the continuance of a normal family life. To enable 
States to furnish such assistance, the Social Security Act passed by the 
Congress in 1935 provides grants-in-aid to States for aid to dependent chil¬ 
dren. A ^dependent child" for the purposes of the act is defined as a child 
under the age of ’l6, or under the age of 18 if attending school, who is 
•deprived of parental support or care by reason of the death, continued absence 
from the home, or physical or mental incapacity of a parent and is living with 
a parent or other specified relative. The Federal Government reimburses the 
States for half the amount they expend for aid to dependent children up to $18 
a month for the first child and $12 for each additional child aided in the 
family. Such grants are made to States that administer programs approved by 
the Social Security Board. Since the States are allowed considerable freedom 
under the act, the laws and regulations governifig the program vary greatly 
from State to State. 


The effects of the various State laws, policies, and practices, as well 
as the provisions of the Social Security Act, are reflected in the character¬ 
istics of the families receiving aid. Consequently, an analysis of these 
characteristics provides one of the most profitable means of appraising the 
operation of aid to dependent children. To provide such information, the 
Social Security Board planned a study of the characteristics of recipients of 
aid to dependent children to be made by States on a voluntary basis. Sixteen 
States made the study in the fall of 19k2; eight of these States included the 
section on family incomes in the study. 


The l6 States are located in all socio-economic regions of the United 
States except the Far West. They are: 


Arizona Kansas 

' Arkansas Louisiana 

District of Columbia l/ Massachusetts 
Illinois Jiissouri 


Montana South Dakota 

Nebraska Utah 

North Carolina West Virginia 
Oklahoma Wisconsin 


These States vary widely not only in geographic location and in social and 
economic conditions but also in laws and policies governing the administration 
of aid to dependent children. They contain 29 percent of the population under 
18 years of age in the United States, and in October 1942 were providing aid 
to dependent children to 37 percent of the families receiving such assistance 
in the country as a whole. 


1/ In this report the District of Columbia is referred to and treated as a 
” State. The fact that the District is completely urban and for this reason 
is not entirely comparable with the other 1$ jurisdictions should be kept 
in mind. 


- 1 - 





- 2 - 


The study was made as of September 19U2 by U States and as of October 
I 9 U 2 by the other 12 States. 2/ In U States, the entire case load was 
analyzed. The size of the samples in the remaining States varied with the 
size of the case load. From two-thirds to one-sixth of the case load was 
studied in 11 States and one-eighth in 1 State. Each sample was selected 
from the State's total case load on a basis intended to assure representative 
results. The sample data were inflated for purposes of analysis so that each 
State has its appropriate weight in data for the I 6 States combined. The 
families represented in this study total 138,060. They contained 331,9U0 
children who had been approved for aid. 3/ 

This report presents the findings of the study on race, size, and compo¬ 
sition of families, the reasons for lack of support or care, and related 
topics. The study also contains information, on the employment status of the 
family, the school and work status of children, and family incomes. The next 
report to be published will discuss family incomes. 




2 / October 19U2 is referred to as the date of the study since the majority of 
the States reported information for that month. 

3 / For particulars of the State studies, see appendix table 1. 





II. RACIHL DIFFERENCES IN RECIPIENT RAIES 


I Race is an important factor in any consideration of the effectiveness of 

public assistance in meeting need, because of a greater prevalence of need 
among minority races. The combined population under 18 years in the l6 States 
participating;in this study contains the major racial groups in almost exactly 
the same proportions as are found in the child population of the United 
States: 88 percent white, 11 percent Negro, and 1 percent other races. Negro 
children, however, constitute more than one-fifth of all children in each of 
U States (Louisiana, District of Columbia, North Carolina, and Arkansas) and 
less than one-thirteenth in each of the other 12 States. The children of 
"other races" are predominantly Indian and are concentrated for the most part 
in U States (Arizona, Montana, South Dakota, and Oklahoma). In these States 
I the proportion of Indian children ranges from 3 percent in Oklahoma to 15 
I percent in Arizona. 1/ 

In October 19U2, approximately 29 of every 1,000 children under age 18 in 
the 16 States combined had been approved for aid to dependent children; the 
rate ranged from 16 in North Carolina to 52 in Oklahoma. 2/ Because of the 
greater incidence of mortality, morbidity, and desertion among nonwhite fami¬ 
lies and their less favorable economic status, it is to be expected that 
relatively more nonwhite than white children will be eligible for aid to 
dependent children. In the 16 States combined, 52 nonwhite children per 1,000 
had been approved for aid in contrast to 25 white children per 1,000. The 
rate for Negro children was 52 per 1,000 Negro children in the population, and 
for Indian children, U7 per 1,000. 

As chart I shows, there is considerably more disparity among States in 
the proportion of nonwhite children aided (from 8 per 1,000 in Arizona to 198 
in Nebraska), than in the proportion of white children aided (from 5 per 1,000 
in the District of Columbia to I4.5 in West-Virginia). 3/ 

In the 10 States with more than 5,000 Negro children in the population, 
the recipient rate for Negro children ranged from lU per 1,000 in North Caro¬ 
lina to 173 in Illinois. In these 10 States, the rate for Negro children 
compares with that for white children as follows: 


1/ Race of the population is shown for each State* in appendix table 2. 

?/ The recipient rate of some States would be somewhat higher than that shown 
" if all eligible children for whom the payment was intended had been ap¬ 
proved for aid. By including the estimated number of children under I6 
years who were eligible but not approved, the recipient rate for Oklahoma 
is raised 1; per 1,000; for North Carolina and Vfest Virginia, 2 per 1,000; 
and for Louisiana and l^ssouri, 1 per 1,000. For discussion of children 
not approved for aid, see page 15* 

.3/ See appendix table U. 






- u - 



Negro 

?fhite 

Illinois. 

173 

17 

Oklahoma. 

1U8 

kh 

Kansas. 

125 

2h 

lilssouri. 

8U 

26 

Massachusetts... 

76 

21 

District of Columbia 

5U 

5 

West Virginia. 

50 

1;5 

Louisiana.; 

U6 

39 

Arkansas. 

22 

22 

North Carolina. 

lU 

17 


In the 6 States at the top of the list, the rate for Negro children was 
approximately from 3 to 10.times that for white children. In West Virginia 
and Louisiana, however, the rate for Negro children was little higher; in 
Arkansas, it was the same; and in North Carolina, it was less than that for 
white children. Since the conditions which render children eligible for aid 
are much more prevalent among Negro than white families, it seems a safe 
assumption that in at least these last U States relatively fewei needy Negro 
children than white children are being aided. 


Chart I.—White and nonwhite children receiving aid per 1,000 population 
under age 18, ADC families, for 16 States, October 19^2 


ALL RACES 


N.C. 

S.DAK. 

ARK. 

D.C. 

MASS. 

ILL. 

WIS. 

KANS. 

NEBR. 

MO. 

ARIZ. 

MONT. 

UTAH 

LA. 

W.VA. 

OKLA. 








n—3 


V/ZZ//A 


V//////X 


V7777\ 


1 


Yzzzzm 


V//777/A 




’////////A 


Tzzzzzzzm 


^zzzzzzzzzzx 


zzzzzzzzzzzzzx 


’/7/7V//////77\ 


WHITE 






Z1 


.......1 




ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZA 


YZL 


c\ ....’A 


V//////X 


V 7 /7 7 /////A 


'////////\ 




y/77/77///7A 




y/y/Y/jz/zz/A 


_L 


25 


25 


NONWHITE 


7ZZZZZZZZZA 


y/zyzA 


//////7//7y/7/7777///A 


TZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZA 


’777777777777777777777777777777777777A 


777777777777777A 


V/ 77Z 7ZZZ 7: ZZyY7/77 7 7 / Zyjyyjy777777777777 7 777y /777 /7A 


Y7/7777777777/7777 7777 77 7 Z/y777777777 7 7777/ 7y /777 7 7y7y yy 7 /y A 


y77777777777777777777777A 


7A 


7ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZA 


ZZZZZZZZZZZZZA 


V7777777777777X 


'77777777777/7/////////777777777777777X 


0 50 100 

.NUMBER PER 1,000 POPULATION UNDER AGE 18 


150 


200 























































































































'Rie States show a similar disparity in the proportion of Indian children 
aided. In the 6 States with more than 5,000 Indian children in the popula¬ 
tion, the rates for Indian children ranged from less than 1 per 1,000 in 
Arizona to 11? in Montana. In these 6 States the recipient rate for Indian 
children compares with that for white children as follows: 



Indian 

White 

Montana. 

117 

30 

Wisconsin. 

106 


Oklahoma. 

76 

hh 

South Dakota.. 

36 

19 

North Carolina 

’10 

17 

Arizona. 

less than 1 

36 


The extent of need among Indians varies greatly from State to State. The 
number of needy Indian children is affected by such factors as the proportion 
that are living on reservations, the amount of tribal funds and other re¬ 
sources of the reservations, and the availability of boarding schools for 
Indian children. Furthermore, the proportion of families lacking support or 
care because of the death, incapacity, or absence of a parent that are in need 
of assistance varies with the ability of members of the family to compete in 
the labor market. The rates, therefore, may not always show accurately the 
relative degree to which a State is aiding needy Indian children. In Montana 
and Wisconsin, where the recipient rate for Indian children is approximately 
four times that for white children, it may be assiuned that needy Indian chil¬ 
dren are not being deprived of aid. In Oklahoma, South Dakota, and North 
Carolina, although the rate for Indian children in the first two is only about 
twice and in the latter less than that for w'hite children, it might be found 
that needy Indian children were receiving aid to the same extent as white 
children, if all factors are taken into account. In Arizona, however, it is 
obvious that Indian children are not receiving the same consideration as needy 
children of other races. 










III. SIZE AND CCMflPOSITION OF FAMILIES 


For the purposes of this study a family was defined as a group of persons 
living together and sharing a common income, which may be received by one 
member of the group or may result from pooling the income of several members* 
Unmarried children and o1^er relatives were counted as members df the family, 
if they were considered as part of the family group and economic unit and not 
as a separate family, even though they paid a definite amount for board and 
room instead of sharing a common family income. "ADC unit" and "assistance 
unit," as used in this analysis, refer to the parent, parents, or supervising 
relative and the children approved for aid. 

Number of Persons per Family 

Ihe families receiving aid to dependent children in the l 6 States com¬ 
bined averaged li .5 persons— 2»k children approved for aid, 0 *U children under 
18 years not approved for aid, and 1.7 persons aged 18 years and over. 


The number of persons per family and the average number of children 
approved for aid were the same for nonwhite and white families. Nonwhite 
families, however, had slightly more children under 18 years not approved 
(0.5 in contrast to O.ii) and slightly fewer persons 18 years and over (i .6 in 
contrast to 1 . 8 ) than white families . 


As shown by the ranges given below, the 16 States varied considerably 
in the number of persons per family; 1 / 


Aid status and age 

All persons. 

Children approved for aid 

Other persons. 

Under l 8 years. 

18 years and over. 


Lowest 

U.l (Ill .5 Mass.) 

2.3 (Ill., Nebr., N.C., 
1.6 (D.C.) 

.1 (Utah) 

1.3 (D.C.) 


Highest 
5.0 (W.Va.) 

Okla., Wis.) 3.1 (D.C.) 

2.6 (N.C.) 

.8 (N.C.) 
1.9 (Okla.) 


One factor which affects the average number of children approved or not 
approved for aid is the Statens maximum age for eligibility for aid to depend¬ 
ent children. 2/ Although in some States failure to approve all eligible 
childrenJLn the family 3/ offsets the effect of the maximum age limitation, 

ADC farflilies in the 6 States in which children must be under 16 years to be 
eligible for aid had a smaller average number of children approved ( 2.3 in 
contrast to 2.U) and a larger number of children under 18 years not approved 
for aid (0.5 in contrast to 0.3) than ADC families in the other 10 States. 


Persons in Addition to ADC Unit 


The small proportion of ADC families that had an adult outside the assist¬ 
ance unit is in itself evidence of the lack of earning power in most of these 
families. Of every 10 ADC families, 5 included only the children approved for 


1/ See appendix table 5* 3/ See discussion, page l5. 

?/ See discussion, pages 10-11. 

- 6 - 














- 7 - 


aid and the parent, parents, or relative in loco parentis; in 2 families all 
additional members were children \mder age 18 or persons aged 65 and over; and 
only 3 families contained additional members between the ages of 18 and 65. 

As might be expected, the proportion of families containing adults in 
addition to the ADC unit was larger for families in which children were living 
with relatives other than a parent (72 percent) than for families with one or 
both parents in the home (1+7 and hi percent, respectively). 


The difference among States in the composition of families receiving aid 
to dependent children is shown by the following ranges in the percent of 
families having specified persons in addition to the ADC unit: h/ 

16 States Lowest Highest 


No other person. 

51.6 

3l;.l (N.C.) 

72 .1; 

(Utah) 

Other person(s). 

All iinder 18 years or 65 years and over 
One or more 18-61; years. 

1 ;8.1; 

lO 

31.6 

27.6 (Utah) 
7.5 (Utah) 
17.1 (D.C.) 

65.9 

28.7 

Ui.U 

(N.C.) 

(N.C.) 

(Okla.) 

Any other person: 5/ 

Under 18 years. 

18 -61; years. 

65 years and over. 

25.U 

31.6 

7.1 

9.1 (Utah) 
17.1 (D.C.) 
1.6 (D.C.) 

hS.3 

hl.h 

9.0 

(N.C.) 
(Okla.) 
(Okla.) 


The proportion of families which contain persons in addition to the ADC 
unit is affected by the two factors previously mentioned—the State's age 
limit for aid to dependent children and the State's practice in regard to 
approving all eligible children in ADC families. Obviously, States which do 
not aid children over 16 years should have a higher proportion of families 
with persons not in the ADC unit. In the 6 States with an age limit of 16 
years, 56.U percent of the ADC families contained additional persons in 
contrast to i;ii.9 percent in the other 10 States. Ihe percent of ADC families 
with children under 18 years who were not included in the ADC unit was 35*2 
for the 6 States and 21.1 for the 10 States. 

Seventeen percent of the ADC families in the 16 States contained children 
under 18 years who were brothers or sisters of the children approved for aid. 
The proportion of families with brothers and sisters who had not been approved 
for aid was 21; percent for families 7d.th both parents in the home, 17 percent 
for families with one parent in the home, and only 8 percent for families with 
neither parent in the home. The range in the proportion of families contain¬ 
ing brothers and sisters who had not been approved was from 6 percent in Utah 
to 37 percent in North Carolina. 6/ In half of the l6 States, more than 20 
percent of the families contained such children. State variations in the 
proportion of children not approved for aid are discussed later. 


k/ See appendix table 6. 

5 ^/ Ihe sum of these percentages is more than the percent of total families 
” .containing other persons since some families contained additional persons 
in different age groups. 

6 / See appendix table 7. 















- 8 - 


Other Persons in Household 

Most of the families receiving aid to dependent children (9U percent) 
lived in households which contained no person outside the family as previously 
defined, liie District of Columbia had the smallest proportion of families 
living alone (86 percent) and North Carolina, next to the smallest (89 per¬ 
cent); Arizona had the largest (99 percent). 7/ 

Three percent of the families had lodgers, the proportion ranging from 
less than 1 percent in Arizona and Utah to more than lU percent in the 
District of Columbia. Ihe next to the highest proportion was less than 6 
percent, in Missouri. 

More than 3 percent of the families had persons other than lodgers, 
chiefly other family units, living in the same household. This proportion 
ranged from less than 1 percent in Arizona, District of Columbia, and Missouri 
to more than 7 percent in.North Carolina. 

Age of Persons in Family 

From the character of the program it is not surprising that ADC families 
have a much larger proportion of children under 18 years and a much smaller 
proportion of persons 18 years and over than families in the general popula¬ 
tion. In the 16 States, as is shown by the following comparison, three-fifths 
of the persons in ADC families were under 18 years in contrast to only one- 
third in all families: 


ADC families 8/ Population 


Under 18 years... 

61.7 

32.8 

18-Uli years. 

23.3 

Ul.2 

U5-6U years ..*.... 

12.3 

19.3 

65 years and over 

2.7 

6.7 


White families receiving aid had a slightly smaller proportion of persons 
in the age groups under U5 years and a larger proportion of persons years 
and over than nonwhite families receiving aid: 



White 9/ 

Nonwhite 

Under 18 years... 

61.0 

6U.2 

18-Iili years. 

22.9 

2U.9 

U5-6U years. 

13.2 

8.9 

65 years and over 

2.9 

2.0 


From the 9 States for which population data are available, most of this dis¬ 
similarity seems to parallel differences between white and nonwhite families 
in the general population. 


7/ See appendix table 8. 

H/ For State data, see appendix table 9. 

£/ Includes some persons of nonwhite races other than Negro. Kie families 

represented by such persons constitute only 0.3 percent of all ADC families. 















The District of Columbia was exceptional in the age distribution of 
persons in ADC 'families, having a much larger proportion under 18 years and a 
much smaller proportion years and over than any of the other States. The 
age distribution of persons in ADC families in the District and the range of 
the proportion in each age group for the other 15 States were as follows: 


Range for 15 States 

District of 

Columbia Lowest Highest 


Under 18 years... 71. 14 . 

18 -UU years. 22.6 

U 5 - 6 i| years. 5.1 

65 years and over .9 


58.8 (Wis.) 
19.6 (Mont.) 
10.2 (Mass.) 
1.7 Ikrlz.) 


65.8 (Ariz.) 
25.6 (Mass.) 
lU.U (Utah) 
U.2 (Nebr.) 


The disparity between the District and other States in this respect is not 
explained by differences in the age distribution .of the general population nor 
by the large proportion of nonwhite families in the District’s ADC case load. 
The unusually large proportion of children under I 8 years in the District's 
ADC families can largely be accounted for, however, by the fact that ADC 
families in the District had a much smaller proportion of one and two-child 
families than those in other States. 10/ 


Persons 18 Years and Over 


Women greatly predominate among the adults in ADC families. Of every 100 
persons aged I 8 years and over, 72 were women. 11 / White and nonwhite fami¬ 
lies, however, differ strikingly in this respect. The percent of females in 
each age group, by race, was as‘follows: 



Total 

White 12/ 

Nonwhite 

TDtal. 

71.7 

70.0 

79.0 

18 -UU years. 

76.2 

71*. 2 

83.3 

h^-6k years. 

69 . 1 * 

68.7 

73.0 

65 years and over 

U3.6 

1 * 2.0 

52 .U 


• Of the persons I 8 years and .over, 69 percent were parents or relatives in 

■ loco parentis, 13 percent were brothers and sisters, and I 8 percent were other 
I relatives of the children receiving aid. n/ Approximately four-fifths of the 
[ parents or relatives in loco parentis were women, while half of all other 
^ persons I 8 years and over were women. 

I Children Under I 8 Years of Age 

I Of every 100 children in ADC families, 20 were under school age, 37 were 

I aged 6-11 years, and U3, aged 12-17 years. Since the majority of children in 
y one-child families are very young and-a smaller proportion of one-child^ 


I “ 10 / See discussion, page 11. 
t 11 / For State data, see appendix table 10. 
I 12/ See footnote 9, page 8. 




















- 10 - 


families than families with more children are eligible for aid to dependent 
children, it is not strange that a smaller percentage of the children in ADC 
families than in the general population are under 6 years of age. The distri¬ 
bution of children under 18 years, by age, in ADC families and in the popu¬ 
lation of the l6 States was as follows; 


ADC families Population 


Under 6 years 20.3 
6-11 years... 36.8 
12-17 years.. U2.9 


31.7 
32.5 

35.8 


VIhite and nonwhite families receiving aid to dependent children are quite 
dissimilar in the age distribution of children, particularly in the proportion 
of children under 6 years and 12-1? years. As is shown by the age distribu¬ 
tion, according to race, of children in ADC families and in the population, 
very little .of this difference between white and nonwhite ADC families can be 
accounted for by differences in the general population: 


ADC families Population 



White 13/ 

Nonwhite 

Tdiite 

Nonwhite 

Under 6 years 

18.9 

25.ii 

31.5 

33.1 

6-11 years... 

36.6 

37.2 

32.U 

32.8- 

12-17 years.. 

14^.5 

37.U 

36.1 

3U.1 


No explanation has been found for the large difference between white and 
nonwhite ADC faimilies in the proportion of children under 6 years. The* 
smaller proportion of children 12-17 years in nonwhite families might be 
accounted for partly by a tendency to reject applications for older nonwhite 
children, but data on this point are not available from this study. 

The great differences among States in the age distribution of children 
in ADC families is shown by the following ranges in the percentages in each 
age group; 0^/ 



16 States 

Lowest 

Highest 

Under 6 years. 

20.3 

15.U 

(iris.) 

26.5 

(D.C.) 

6-11 years.... 

36.8 

33.6 

(Wis.) 

39.8 

(D.C.) 

12-17 years... 

U2.9 

33.7 

(D.C.) 

51.0 

(Wis.) 

12-13 years 

15.5 

lU.U 

(ir.Va.) 

17.2 

(S.Dak.) 

lU-l5 years 

16.1 

12.6 

(D.C.) 

18.9 

(iris.) 

16-17 years 

11.3 

6.2 

(D.C.) 

15.0 

(Wis.) 


One factor accounting for differences in the proportion of children aged 
16-17 is the maximuin age for eligibility for aid to dependent children. The 
Social Security Act originally -limited assistance to children aged 16 but was 


13/ See footnote 9, page 8. 
m / See appendix table 11. 

















- 11 - 


amended in 1939 to extend eligibility to children aged 16 and 1? provided they 
were attending school regularly. At the time of this study, 6 of the 16 
States (Arizona, District of Columbia, Missouri, Nebraska, Oklahoma, and South 
Dakota) had not taken advantage of this amendment and did not aid children 
&ged 16 years and over. The families in each of these 6 States had rela¬ 

tively fewer children aged 16-17 years than families in any of the other 
States. The ADC families in States that aid children up to 18 years are 
likely to have a larger proportion of children 16-1? years than those in 
States that aid only children under 16 years. The first group of States will 
aid some families in which the only children are aged 16 or over. Moreover 
there may be a tendency for children 16 years and over to leave home in search 
of work if aid is discontinued at 16 years and’ no other resource is available 
to help them stay ‘in school. 

Variations in the proportion of children aged 16-1? years are not respon¬ 
sible, however, for the wide differences among States in the proportion of 
children at other ages. The age distribution of children under 16 years 
varied among States as follows: 

16 States Lowest Highest 


Under 6 years... 22.9 17.9 (S.Dak.) 28.2 (D.C.) 

6-11 years. Ul.5 39.5 (Wis.) 1|3.2 (Mass.) 

12-13 years. 17.5 15.9 (D.C.) 20.2 (Wis.) 

114-15 years. 18.1 I3.5 (D.C.) 22.2 (Wis.) 


The disparity among States in the age distribution of children under I6 years 
cannot be accounted for ly the differences in the proportion of white and 
nomrtiite families receiving aid, since the age distributioiBof white children 
under I6 years are correspondingly dissimilar. 

Distribution of Families by Number of Children 


One-fourth of the families receiving aid to dependent children in the 16 
States had only one ckild under 18 years, slightly more than one-fourth had 
two children, and slightly less than half had three or more children. In the 
number of children under I8 years, ADC families differ from families in the 
general population as follows: 



Percent having specified number 
of children under I8 years 


1 child 

2 children 

3 or more 
children 

Families receiving aid to dependent 
children, I6 States, October 19i;2.. 

21*. 6 

27.6 

1*7.8 

Total families in general population 
having children under I8 years, 

16 States, 19140 census. 

1*0.7 

28.0 

31.3 


15/ In Wisconsin, although the age limit was 21 years, aiding children over I6 
was optional with counties. 


638074 O- 


-3 




















- 12 - 


It is only natural for ADC families to have a smaller proportion of 
one-child families and a larger proportion of families with three or more 
children than families in the general population, since families with only one 
child deprived of support or care are more often able to get along without 
public aid than families with more than one dependent child. The great dis¬ 
similarity among States in the relative number of ADC families having one 
child raises a question, however, whether some States have not overestimated 
the ability of small fajnilies to make their own way when the support or care 
of a parent is lacking. Ihe difference among the 16 States in the percent 
of ADC families with specified number of children is shoym ty the following 
ranges: 16/ 



l6 States 

Lowest 

Highest 

1 child. 

2U.6 

12.0 (D.C., 

31.7 (Ill.) 

2 children. 

27.6 

22.6 (D.C.) 

32.5 (Mass.) 

3 children. 

20.1 

18.7 (Kans.) 

26.2 (D.C.) 

U children. 

12.8 

10.1 (Wis.) 

17.9 (D.C.) 

5 children. 

7.6 

i;.9 (Mass,, Wis.) 

11.2 (Ariz.) 

6 children. 

3.9 

1.8 (Mass.) 

6.7 (Ariz.) 

7 or more children.. 

3.U 

2.0 O'Jass,, S.Dak.) 

6.0 (W.Va.) 


Some of these differences are attributable to differences among States 
in population characteristics. According to the 19h0 census, the average 
number of children per family having children \mder 18 years varied in the l6 
States from 1.9 in the District of Columbia to 2.6 in North Carolina and West 
Virginia, The next to the lowest State was Illinois, with 2.0. Another fact 
which might possibly account for differences in the distribution of ADC 
families by number of children is that in some States these families draw 
more heavily from nonwhite families, which have more children per family than 
white families. For example, in the District of Columbia nonwhite families 
represent 81; percent of the ADC families, but only 25 percent of the families 
in the population with children under 18 years; the average number of children 
under 18 year's in the District is 1.8 per white family in contrast to 2,5 per 
nonwhite family. If the effect of such differences is eliminated, the pro¬ 
portion of ADC families with one child, with two children, and with three or 
more children might be expected to be moderately constant from State to State, 
provided the same policies were followed with respect to the acceptance of 
one-child and larger families. 

When the data are adjusted for State differences in the number of chil¬ 
dren per family in the total population, the proportion of ADC families with 
fewer than three children was 26 percent in the District of Columbia and k3 
percent in Arizona, in contrast to proportions varying from 1;9 to 58 percent 
in the other States. Excluding the District and Arizona, the ranges in the 
relative proportion of ADC families with specified numbers of children were as 
follows for the other lU States: with one child, from 20 to 33 percent; with 
two children, from 2k to 33 percent; and for three or more children, from 1;2 
to 52 percent. Chart II shows this adjusted distribution of ADC families with 
specified number of children foi each State. Ij/ 


16 / See appendix table 12. 
17/ See appendix table 13. 














- 13 - 


Chart II .—kDC families, by number of children,* 
for 16 States, October 19U2' 


0 


20 


40 


60 


D.C. 

ARIZ. 

MO. 

N.C. 

OKLA. 

MASS. 

S.DAK. 

W.VA. 

KANS. 

ARK. 

ILL. 

LA. 

NEBR. 

MONT. 

WIS. 

UTAH 








m^ytiyiiiimmL'y/yyyyyy/yy/7//yyyy/zzL 


^^mmmmm^yyyyyyy/yyyyyyyyyyyzzE. 




ymmmmmmmi'yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyT;^. 


i 




mmmm^mwz<'y22zyyyyyyyyyyyyy^ 


m^^mmmmmm^yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyin 


myy^<m^ymm^^m^yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyz^ 


80 


100 


yy^mymmmmt'yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyzzzEi 


■'^■y<<ym^^^m^y^yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy^ 




yyyym^y^mmm^m^yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy^^^^ 




TWO CHILDREN 


i:-:;:!:! THREE OR MORE CHILDREN 


* Adjusted for differences among State ooDulations In tne numoer of cnlldren per family. 


It is not possible to adjust the data for all States to eliminate dif¬ 
ferences resulting from the fact that nonwhite families on the ADC rolls were 
disproportionate to their number in the population, because the census gives 
information on the number of nonwhite families with children under 18 years 
only for selected States. . However, since the previous adjustment indicated 
underrepresentation of one and two—child families among those receiving aid in 
only the District of Columbia and Arizona, it is not so important to consider 
the effect of this factor in the other lU States. 

Adjustment of the data for the District of Columbia for the overrepresen¬ 
tation of nonwhite families in the ADC case load only partially explains the 
small proportion of one—child families. Even after this adjustment the 
District has a much smaller proportion of ADC families with one child (less 
than 12 percent) than any of the other States. Although the population of the 
District of Columbia increased considerably between the time of the 1940 
census and the date of this study, a large part of the increase consisted of 
single persons. It seems unlikely that the incoming families with children 
under 18 years were sufficiently different from the family population of 19U0 
in number of children to account for the disparity between the District of 
Columbia and the other States in the distribution of ADC families by number 
of children. 

















































- 11 ; - 


Census data are not 'available to make a similar adjustment of the data 
for Arizona. On the other hand, since ADC families in Arizona had a smaller 
proportion of nonwhite families than are found in its population, it may 
safely be assiimed that this further adjustment would tend to decrease rather 
than increase the proportion of one and two-child families among those receiv¬ 
ing aid. Thfere is another circumstance, however, which is probably respon¬ 
sible for the fact that Arizona was unlike' the majority of the States in the 
distribution of ADC families by number of children. Spanish-American fami¬ 
lies, which in general have more children than other v/hite families, consti¬ 
tuted percent of the ADC families. In 1930, only 26 percent of Arizona's 
population was Spanish-American. Although the population in October 19U2 may 
have contained a larger proportion of Spanish-American families than in 1930, 
\inquestionably the proportion of Spanish-American families was much higher 
among ADC families than among total families in the State. It seems most 
likely that if the data could be adjusted to take into account the character¬ 
istics of the separate segments of the population from which the ADC families 
are drawn, Arizona would not be found to have a smaller proportion of one and 
two-child families than the majority of the 15 other States. 

As shown below, among ADC families the proportion having only one child 
under 18 years was much smaller than the proportion with one chila approved 
for aid, and the proportion having three or more children was much larger than 
the proportion with this number of children approved. 


Percent of ADC families 
having specified number of— 


Children under 
18 years 


Children approved 
for aid 18/ 


1 child. 21;. 6 33.9 

2 children. 27.6 28.2 

3 or more children... U7.8 37.9 

This great disparity is explained by the facts previously mentioned that (1) 
some children of eligible age under the Federal act are not eligible in 
certain States, and (2) a considerable number of children of eligible age 
under the State plan were not approved.for aid in some States. 


1^/ For State data, see appendix table ll;. 










IV. CHILDREN NOT APPROVED FOR AID 


In many of the l6 States, agencies fail to approve for assistance all 
eligible children who are supported in whole or. in part by aid to dependent 
children. The payment approved for many families is less than the maximum 
monthly payment permissible under the State plan for the number of dependent 
chil^en in the family. A variety of circumstances may account for this fact. 
Some families have income and other resources and so do not require the 
maximum amount of assistance; other families may need the maximum amount, but 
the agency’s finances do not permit meeting need in full for any families; and 
sometimes, usually when funds are limited, agency standards for determining 
need are so low as to result in maximum paymerfts for only a few cases, even 
though need, as determined by the agency, is met in full. When the monthly 
payment to be approved is less than the State maximum, it is more or less the 
practice in some States to determine eligibility and approve for aid only the 
number of children necessary to justify the monthly payment approved. In 
States that have a maximum which is the same as the Federal matching maximum 
of ^^18 for one child and ^12 for each additional child or is higher, certifi¬ 
cation of only the number of children necessary to obtain full Federal match¬ 
ing will be in conformity with the State plan. For exan 5 >le, if a monthly 
payment of ^30 is to be given to a family including four eligible children, 
the State can* comply with the provisions of its plan and receive full Federal 
matching of the pajnnent by certifying only two of the children. 

Another practice which results in approval of fewer than the total number 
of children actually aided is the failure to certify children born l/ or 
returned from foster care after approval of the family’s application for aid. 
Failure to certify such a child does not always deprive the family of addi¬ 
tional assistance because a few States have a limit on the total payment to a 
family which would present an increase in the payment to some families even 
though another dependent child is added to the family group. 

Since the plans of 6 States participating in the study provide for 
assistance only to age l6, children under and over that age are considered 
separately in the folidwing discussion. 

Children Under 16 Years Not Approved 

Missoiiri is the only State which prescribed school attendance as a con¬ 
dition of eligibility for children Ih and l5 years of age. The ADC families 
in all States contained other children under age l6 who, for various reasons, 
were ineligible for aid to dependent children. For example, some children in 
ADC families are self-supporting; some children approved for aid are not 
living with a parent, but in the home of another relative who is able to 
support his own children; and, in a few instances, the family may consist of 
an ADC unit sharing a common income with a group of self-supporting persons, 
including children who do not need aid. Consequently, a small number of 


1/ None of the approved children were born after family's application in 8 
- “ States, less than 1 percent in 3 States, and from 1.2 to 3.7 percent in 
U States. 


- 15 - 





- 16 - 


children of eligible age who have not been approved for aid would normally be 
expected in families receiving aid to dependent children. The disparity among 
the States in the proportion not approved indicates, however, that in some 
States a considerable number of children of eligible age have failed to be 
approved for reasons other than those mentioned above. In the families receiv¬ 
ing aid in the 16 States, alii»st 9 percent of the children under l6 years had 
not been approved for assistance. In North Carolina almost 20 percent had not 
been approved for aid, but in Massachusetts only a little more than 2 percent. 

Chart III.—Children in specified age groups not approved for aid, 

ADC families, for l6 States, October 19k2 

UNDER 6 YEARS 6-11 YEARS 12-15 YEARS 

N.C. 

OKLA. 

ARIZ. 

W.VA. 

LA. 

MO. 

WIS. 

NEBR. 

ARK. 

ILL. 

S.DAK. 

MONT. 

KANS. 

MASS. 

D.C. 

UTAH 


0 10 20 30 0 10 0 10 

PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT 

Die highest proportion of children under age 16 not approved was in the 
group aged less than 6 years. In t States, more than 20 percent of the chil¬ 
dren under 6 years were not approved; in 6 States, between 10 and 20 percent; 
and in 6 States, less than 10 percent (chart III). The percent of children of 
specified age in ADC families who were not approved for aid, by race, was as 
follows; 2/ 



Ibtal 

VOiite 3/ 

Nonv/hite 

Under l6 years. 

8.8 

7.7 

12.3 

Under 6 years... 

17.1; 

16.3 

20.3 

6-11 years. 

6.1 

5.3 

8.7 

12-15 years. 

6.3 

5.5 • 

9.8 





2/ For State data, see appendix table l5. 


3/ See footnote 9, page 8. 
























































































- 17 - 


Approximately 7,700 children aged 12-15 years were not approved for aid. 
Of these, ^UO children, most of them lU and 15 years old, were not attending 
school and were working. Some of these children may have been self-supporting. 

As shown above, relatively more nonwhite children than white children in 
each age group were not approved. These differences may be explained partly 
by the greater difficulties in establishing the eligibility of nonwhite chil¬ 
dren; the required evidence of age or relationship to the payee is sometimes 
not easily obtainable. Failure to approve very many children cannot be 
attributed to this fact, however, because the proportion of white children not 
approved, especially in the group aged less than 6 years, also was high. The 
percent of white and of nonwhite children under age 16 who were not approved 
for aid is shown for each State in chart IV. 

Chart IV.—White* and nonwhite children 
under age l6 not approved for aid, ADC 
fanilies, for l6 States, October 19U2 


PERCENT OF CHILDREN 

0 10 20 30 



* Includes, In 10 States, some children of nonwhite races other 
than Negro. ’-The families represented by such children constitute 
less than 1 percent of the ADC families In 8 States and approxi¬ 
mately 2 percent In tne other 2 States. 


When the eligibility of some children has been established, aid for them 
should not be delayed if it is apparent that establishing eligibility for 
other children in the family will require considerable time. On the other 
hand, the practice of determining eligibility for some but not aU 
children whose eligibility can be determined promptly, while saving the 
worker's time, has serious disadvantages. Ihe practice of not approving all 
children for aid does not at the time directly affect the f^lies receiving 

















































- 18 - 




aid, if it can be assumed' that the payment to the family would be the same no 
matter how many more children were approved. Failure to certify all the 
eligible children in ADC families is eventually detrimental to the fainilies, 
however, because it may conceal tlie inadequacies of the prograun and may hamper 
intelligent administrative planning and legislative action. Ihe State may not 
know the total number of needy children in families receiving aid to dependent 
children or the total amount of funds required to finance the program in 
accordance with State standards. The recipient rate for children and the 
average payment per child cannot be compared validly with those in other 
States. liYhile the average payment per child does not take into account many 
factors pertinent to a consideration of adequacy, it is useful as a rough 
meas'ure of the relative level of assistance among localities and States and is 
frequently used in demonstrating to legislatures the need for additional funds 
for assistance. 

It is estimated that the families receiving aid to dependent children in 
5 States (North Carolina, Oklahoma, nest Virginia, Louisiana, and Missouri) 
contained an aggregate of more than 9,000 eligible children under 16 years who 
were not approved for aid. k/ 

Children 16-17 Years Not Approved 


More than half of all children aged 16-1? in the families receiving aid 
to dependent children in the 16 States had not been approved for aid. In the 
10 States that set the age limit at 18 years or above, more than one-third of 
the children 16-17 years had not been approved for aid. The proportion of 
nonwhite children 16-17 years who had not been approved was only slightly 
higher than the proportion of white children. In the 10 States vdiich’ gave aid 
to children until age 18, the percent of children 16-17 years in ADC families 
who were not approved for aid, by race, was as follows: 


Total Vjhite 5/ Nonwhite 


Ibtal, 10 States 

36.7 

36.2 

38.9 

North Carolina. 

63o 

62.6 

66.2 

ViJest Virginia. 

51.2 

52.2 

39.7 

Arkansas. 

U6,3 

U5.3 

1;9.7 

Louisiana. 

35.3 

33.U 

38.7 

Massachusetts. 

31.9 

31.7 

35.5 

Illinois. 

29.8 

30.1 

28.7 

Wisconsin. 

26.2 

26.5 

7.1 

Kansas.. 

2U.6 

21;.9 

22.1; 

itontana. 

22.1 

20.9 

33.3 

Utah. 

13.1 

13.1 

.... 


h/ Ihis estimate assumes that 7 percent of the children under 16 years in ADC 
families in these States were ineligible for various reasons. This allow¬ 
ance is generous, since two other States with less than 6 percent of the 
children under 16 years not approved found upon investigation that some of 
the children not approved were eligible, and since in ^ States k percent 
or less of' the children under l6 years were not approved for aid. 

5/ See footnote 9, page 8. 





















- 19 - 


,3^t- is not surprising that even in the States that have an age limit of 
18 years a higher proportion of children were not approved among those I 6 -I 7 
years than in younger age groups, since relatively more of these children are 
self-supporting or are ineligible for aid because they are not attending 
school. Of the 11,800 children aged I 6 -I 7 not approved for aid in these 10 
States, 2,U00 or 20 percent were attending school. Nineteen percent of the 
not approved white children were attending school, in contrast to 26 percent 
of the nonwhite children. A child was considered as attending school even 
though because of illness, vacation, or other reason, he was not in school 
during the month of the study, if he was enrolled and expected to return, 
llie proportion of children I 6 -I 7 years who h^ not been approved for aid, 
according to school attendance status, is shoim for each of the 10 States in 
chart V. 


Chart V.—^Percent of children aged I 6 -‘ 
17 not approved for aid, by school 
attendance status, ADC families, 
for 10 States, October 19U2* 

PERCENT 

0 20 40 60 

N.C. 

W.VA. 

ARK. 

LA. 

MASS. 

ILL. 

WIS. 

KANS. 

MONT. 

UTAH 




mM^y/////////////////////////A 


I I 

'ymy/y/yyyy7y///y//yyy//zzm 


myyyyyyyyy/y/yy/yT/TA 




m^yyyyyyyyyyy/yjx 




7myyy/yyyyyy/A 


^x^/////////A 



ATTENDING SCHOOL 
NOT ATTENDING SCHOOL 

J_^_ 


* Age limit for aid .was 18 years In all 10 States except Wis¬ 
consin, which had limit of 21 years but left to counties option 
of aiding children 16 years and over. School attendance was 
eligibility requirement for this age group In all 10 States, 

exceot Wisconsin. t x* 'al. 

TWO factors doubtless partially responsible for lack of approval of the 
children 16-17 years who were in school are the relatively greater difficulty 
of proving age of older children and the necessity of determining school 
attendance. In the States which approve fewer than the total number of chil¬ 
dren for whom the assistance payment is intended, there may be a tendency in 
some cases to approve younger rather than older children. 

In the 10 States that aid children 16-17 years of age if they are attend¬ 
ing school, 80 percent of the children of this age not approved for aid, or 
approximately 9,U00 children, were not in school. Eighty-one percent of the 
white children, in contrast to only Ik percent of the nonwhite children, were 
not in school. Presumably, most of these children would be eligible for aid 

if they were in school. 



























- 20 - 


Lack of appropriate school facilities, particularly in rural areas, 
undoubtedly prevented some of these children from continuing their education. 
Furthermore, where schools were available, some ADC families may not have been 
able to afford the additional expense involved in the children's school 
attendance. In view of the increased job opportunities for children aged l6 
and 17 in the autumn of 19h2, it is surprising that more than half of the 
children 16-17 years who were not*attending school were also not working. 
Children reported as working, however, do not include those who were engaged 
in work which was part of a family enterprise, such as a store operated by the 
family or a farm. 

•Die requirement of school attendance in the Social Security Act was 
adopted on the assun^tion that children l6 and 17 years of age could choose 
between working or going to school and that the availability of assistance 
would encourage them to stay in school. The Social Security Board has recom¬ 
mended the deletion of the school attendance clause, since it is apparent that 
assistance must be denied certain needy children under the age of 18 who can 
neither attend school nor work. 


V. RELA.TIVES WITH WHOM CHILDREN WERE LIVING 


Although the Social Security Act provides for Federal participation in 
payments to children living with specified relatives other than parents the 
great majority of children receiving aid are living with parents. Of every 
100 families aided in the 16 States in the fall of 19U2, 90 had one or both 
parents in the home (the mother only in 69 , both parents in 19 , and the father 
only in 2 ) and 10 comprised children who were living in the homes of other 
relatives. 


In this report a child is considered to be living with a parent if that 
parent was in the home. 1/ A child living vfith his mother and stepfather or 
father and stepmother is classified as living with both parents. A child 
living with a stepparent, if no natural parent was in the home, is classified 
as living with a parent. Ihe children were living with a stepparent in rela¬ 
tively few families, lU in every 1 , 000—12 with mother and stepfather, 1 with 
father and stepmother, and 1 with a stepparent with no natural parent in the 
home. 


The small proportion of families in which the children were living with 
the father only and the range among States in the proportion of such families 
(from 0.3 percent in the District of Columbia to 3.2 percent in Oklahoma) 
raises a question whether families deprived of the® support or care of the 
mother are being assisted by some States in numbers proportionate to the need 
of this group. 

The 16 States vary greatly in the proportion of families in which chil¬ 
dren were living with father or mother or a relative in loco parentis. The 
States having the lowest and highest percent of families in which children 
were living with specified relative yieve as follows: 2 / 

Lowest Highest 


Mother only. 36.8 (La.) Q2,h (D.C.) 

Both parents. 9.7 (Ill.) 33.0 (W.Va.) 

Father only. .3 (D.C.) 3-2 (Okla.) 

Other relatives... 6.0 (S.Dak.) 13.2 (Nebr.) 


Chart VI shows, for each State, the proportion of families in which chil¬ 
dren were living with one parent, both parents, or neither parent. Certain 
factors which account for some of these differences among States will be con¬ 
sidered in the discussion of reasons for dependency. 

V^Tiile the number of children receiving aid was 2.U per family, the 
average for families in which the children were living with both parents 
was 3.1; with mother only, 2,3; with father only, 2.U; and with other 


1/ In some instances, even though a parent is in the home, another relative 
receives the payment and is looked upon by the agency as the supervising 
relative. Ihe relative to whom the payment was made is discussed later. 
£/ See appendix table l 6 . 


- 21 - 









- 22 - 


Chart VI.—Relative with whom children receiving aid were 
living, ADC families, for 16 States, October 19ii.2 

. PERCENT OF FAMILIES 

0 20 40 60 80 100 


D.C. 

ILL. 

MASS. 

S. OAK, 

WIS. 

KANS. 

N.C. 

ARIZ. 

OKLA. 

MO. 

MONT. 

NEBR. 

ARK. 

UTAH 

W. VA. 

LA. 


relatives, 1.7. Because of these differences in the average number of chil¬ 
dren, the percentage distribution of children according to the relative with 
whom they were living differs from the corresponding distribution of families 
as follows: 


Percent of families in 

Relative with whom which children were living Percent of children living 

child was living with specified relatives with specified relative 


Mother. 69.2 66.6 

Both parents. 19.6 2^.1 

Neither parent.... 9.6 6.6 

Father. 1.6 1*7 


Of every 20 homes in which neither parent was present, 12 were maintained 
by a grandparent of the children receiving aid, 5 by an aunt or uncle, 2 by a 
brother or sister, and 1 by other relatives. The percentage distribution of 
families with a relative in loco parentis, by sex and relationship to children 
of this person, was as follows: 


till 


1 1 1 1 

\ 

K 

\ 

\ 

\ 

X 

1 

i 

1 

1 1 1 1 


1 1 ! 1 


1 1 1 1 

1 1 1 1 




1 1 1 1 

\ 

\ 

! 

\ 

I 

j 

1 

1 

1 1 1 1 


III! 


1 1 1 1 



1 1 1 1 

I I 1 1 


1 1 1 1 


I'll 




ONE PARENT V//A TWO PARENTS (MMlI OTHER RELATIVE 


t 

























































23 - 


Families Percent with specified 

with neither relative in loco parentig 

Relative in parent 


loco parentis 

in home 

Total 

Male 

Female 

Ibtal. 

13,191* 

100.0 

17.7 

82.3 

Grandparent. 

8,111 

61.5 

10.5 

^1.0 

Aunt or uncle. 

3,137 

23.8 

h.l 

19.1 

Sister or brother... 

1,268 

9.6 

1.6 

8.0 

Other relatives. 

678 

5.1 

.9 

U.2 


Relative to 7/hom Payment Was Made 

Of every 20 families receiving aid to dependent children, the assistance 
payment was made to the mother in 16, to the father in 2, to a grandmother in 
1, and to another relative in 1. The "other relative" was most often an aunt, 
with grandfather and sister next in frequency. As indicated below, the mother 
received the payment in 62 percent of the families in which the children were 
living with both parents, but this proportion varied from 26 percent in 
Arkansas to 99 percent in Massachusetts and Wisconsin. The mother received 
the payment in 99 percent of the families when she was the only parent in the 
home, while the father received the payment in 96 percent of the families 
when he was the only parent in the home. 


Percent with payee of 


Relative with 
whom child 
was living 

Total 

families 

Specified relationship to 

children 

Mother 

Father 

Grand¬ 

mother 

Other 

relative 

Total. 

138,060 

80.7 

9.1 

ill 

3/ 

Both parents. 

27,005 

61.7 

38.2 

.1 

(U) 

Mother only. 

95,586 

99.1 

(U) 

.6 

.3 

Father only. 

2,275 

.2 

96.1 

2.8 

.9 

Other relative... 

13,191* 

.1 

.1 

51.0 

U8.8 


The practice of making the payment to the mother when both parents are in 
the home and of sometimes making the payment to a female relative when the 
father is the only parent in the home' is undoubtedly the result of the 
emphasis placed upon the mother by the old mothers'-aid programs. In order to 
uphold the father's status as head of the family, some States make thel payment 
to him whenever possible. Bie Illinois Division of Public Assistance declares: 


"In many cases where both father and mother are in the home, 
the father is incapacitated and unable to support his family but is 
still able to act as the head of the group in planning for their 
welfare. In such circumstances, although the mother woiad actually 
assume the major responsibility for the care of the children, it 
may be best for the father to file the application and to act as 


3/Aunt, 1.8; grandfather, 1.2; sister, 0.8; all other relatives, 1.1. 
5/ Less than 0.05 percent. 





























- 2U - 


grantee relative. It is important that normal relationships in 
the family group be maintained insofar as possible. If the assist¬ 
ance grant is made in the name of the father, he may still be looked 
upon by the children as the source of their support." £/ 

The l6 States differ strikingly in the relative number of families with 
both parents (natural or adoptive) in the home in which the father was the 
payee. The proportion ranged from 1 percent in Wisconsin to 76 percent in 
Arkansas. The father received the payment in less than one-fifth of these 
•families in 6 States, and in more than two-thirds in 3 States (chart VII). 6/ 


c 

Chart VII.—Relative receiving payment in ADC families with 
both parents-Jt in the home, for I 6 States, October 19h2 

PERCENT OF FAMILIES 

20 40 60 80 100 

WIS. 

MASS. 

S. DAK. 

D.C. 

NEBR. 

N.C. 

MONT. 

ARIZ. 

MO. 

OKLA. 

ILL. 

W. VA. 

KANS. 

UTAH 

LA. 

ARK. 

1 1 1 1 


%^7777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777Z 

1 1 I I 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

1 1 1 1 

^^^^^77777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777Z 

1 1 1 1 

’^S^^^V777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777 


1 

\ 

\ 

\ 

$ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

1 

till 

\ 

1 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

1 1 1 1 

'^^^^^^^^777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777'y 

1 1 1 1 

"^^^^^^^^^^^7777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777/ 

1 1 1 1 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^V7777777777V77777777V77777777777777777V777777Y77T7777/ 

1 1 1 1 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

1 1 1 1 

, 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

1 

1 1 1 1 



1 

I 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

\ 

! 

1 1 1 1 


1 1 1 1 


1 1 1 1 




FATHER \///0i mother HH OTHER 


* Natural or adoptive. 


5/ Illinois Division of Public Assistance, Manual of Policy and Procedure , 
revised January I9I4.2. 

6/ See appendix table 17. ' 










































VI. REASONS FOR LACK OF SUPPORT OR CARE 


Title IV of the Social Security Act authorizes Federal financial partici¬ 
pation in assistance granted by State public assistance agencies in behalf of 
needy children who have been "deprived of parental support or care by reason 
of the death, continued absence from the home, or physical or mental inca¬ 
pacity of a parent" and who are living with one or both parents or with other 
specified relatives. The Social Security Act, however, does not define 
"continued absence" and "incapacity" and therefore is susceptible to broad or 
narrow interpretation of these provisions. 

State public assistance agencies have formulated policies and developed 
rules and regulations for detennining eligibility that range from very general 
provisions to specific definitions. States which have detailed and specific 
provisions for the determination of eligibility vary greatly in many particu- 
lars. In States vrith broad and general provisions, the practice in particular 
situations may vary among local agencies and can .be ascertained only by 
detailed review of local practices. The exhaustive examination of practice 
necessary to explain all State differences is beyond the scope of this study, 
but the findings here suggest areas in which more detailed study might be 
profitable. 

This study confirms what less comprehensive data previously have indi¬ 
cated—that the differences arrwng States in defining absence and incapacity 
result in great lack of uniformity in the types of families receiving aid to 
dependent children, and that many States are far from making full use of the 
provisions of the Social Security Act. 

Major Reasons 


To show the various factors contributing to the dependency of children 
receiving aid to dependent cliildren in the l6 States, information was 
collected on the status of each parent, without regard to the reason for lack 
of support or care which was used as the basis for eligibility. 1/ 

Of the reasons for lack of support or care recognized by the Social 
Security Act, death was the most important single factor in the dependency of 
families aided in the 16 States in the fall of 19^2:. In 39 percent of the 
families one parent was dead, and in an additional 3 percent, the children 
were full orphans. Absence from the home for reasons other than incapacity 
ranked second. What may be summarized as estrangement from family 2/ 
accounted for the great preponderance of such absences, but a few parents 
were absent in the armed forces, or imprisoned, or absent for other reasons. 
In 37 percent of the families, one or both parents were absent because of 
estrangement from the family. Incapacity ranked third as a reason for 
dependency. In 28 percent of the families, lack of support or care of the 


1/ The proportion of all ADC families in the l6 States having each combina- 
~ tion of reasons'for lack of support or care by father and by mother is 
shown in appendix table 19. 

2/ Includes divorce, desertion, separation, and the father not married to the 
” mother. 


- 25 - 





- 26 - 


children was occasioned or intensified by incapacity of one or both parents, 
living either in the home or elsewhere, 3/ 

As shown below, lack of support or care by the father was a far more 
important cause of dependency than loss of support or care by the mother. 

Percent of 

Reason for l ack of support or care total families 3/ 


Death. Ul.U 

Father only. 3U.6 

Mo ther only.. U. 2 

Bo th parents. 2.6 

Absence from home (for reasons other than incapacity) Ii-0«1 

Father only... 36.U 

Mother only. 1.2 

Both parents. 2,6 

Incapacity.. 27.6 

Father only. 21.0 

Mother only. 6.6 

Both parents. 1.1 


Ordinarily the mother of young children is needed full time in the home 
to care for the children and to maintain the home. If the father dies, throv^s 
off family ties’or responsibilities, or becomes incapacitated, the dual 
burdens of support and care usually fall upon the mother. Unless there is 
another person in the home to care for the children, the mother is frequently 
unable to assume the additional burden of support. Sometimes she is able to 
work on a part-time basis but often not at all. Hence, for many families the 
inevitable consequence of loss of support by the father is dependency. 

In the discussion v^hich follows the reasons for lack of support or care 
by the father and by the mother are considered separately. Since 98 percent 
of the fathers were dead, absent from the home, or incapacitated, in contrast 
to only 17 percent of the mothers, the more detailed analysis of State differ¬ 
ences in reasons for dependency will be based largely on the reasons for lack 
of support or care by the father. ^ 

Lack of Support or Care by the Father 


In almost four-fifths of the families receiving aid to dependent children 
in the 16 States, the father was not in the home. Among the families in which 
the father was not in the home, death was the most important single factor, 
and estrangement from family ranked second in loss of the father’s support or 
care. In families in which the father was in the home, incapacity was the 
principal reason, k/ 


3/ liie percentages shown total more than 100, since families in which the 

father was unable to provide support or care for one reason and the mother, 
for another, have been counted twice. For State data, see appendix table 2L 
k/ For State data, see appendix table 22. 




















- 27 - 


Reason for lack of support Percent of 

or care by the father total families 


All reasons. 100,0 


Not in the home.*. 78.8 

Dead. 37.2 

Estranged from family ^/.... 3^.8 

Incapacitated. 2.7 

Absent for other reasons.... 3«1 

In the home. 21.2 

Incapacitated. 19. U 

Other reasons. 1,8 


Death of the Father 


Under the programs of mothers' aid antedating the Social Security Act, 
the children of widowed mothers were frequently the only children, and always 
the major group, eligible for aid. It may be assumed that all States adminis¬ 
tering aid to dependent children are assisting the children of widows to the 
extent that such children are determined to be economically needy in accord¬ 
ance with the State's practices in establishing need. Presumably State 
programs of aid to dependent children are more uniform in the acceptance of 
families in which the father is dead than in the acceptance of families lack¬ 
ing support or care for any other reason. In establishing lack of parental 
support or care, both incapacity and continued absence are variously defined 
by the States, but death is hardly subject to qualification. 

The number of widows receiving aid to dependent children in the I6 States 
in October 19h2 was 17 per 100 families in the population having a female 
widowed head and children. 6/ The number ranged from 6 in the District of 
Columbia to 30 in Arizona (chart VIII). 7/ The variation among States in the 
recipient rate of widows is attributable partly to differences in the propor¬ 
tion of widows with c'hildren who are needy, but largely to differ^ces in 
agency practice in determining need. Unfortunately, it is impossible from 
available data to separate these factors and to determine the effect of each. 

Although benefits under old age and survivors insurance are not paid on 
the basis of individual determination of need, this program might be e^qpected 
to have an effect on aid to dependent children by providing for some orphaned 
children who otherwise would be eligible for assistance. Possibly because of 
the newness of the program and its coverage limitations, old age and sur¬ 
vivors insurance had not affected aid to dependent children significantly in 


5/ See footnote 2, page 25. 

i/ The number of families with female widowed heads and children is estimated 
“ by applying I9U0 census data on percent of female widowed heads with chil¬ 
dren in urban, rural-nonfarm, and rural-farm population in North East, 
North Central, South, and West regions to corresponding State figures on 
the number of female widowed heads, 

7/ See appendix table I8. 
















- 28 - 


October I 9 I 4 . 2 . The rates for fatherless children receiving payments under the 
two programs show no correlation in the I 6 States. 

Chart VIII.—ADC families with widowed mother 
per 100 families in population with 
children and widowed female head, 
for 16 States, October 19U2 


NUMBER PER 100 FAMILIES IN POPULATION 
0 10 20 30 

D.C. 

ARK. 

MASS. 

N.C. 

ILL. 

LA. 

KANS. 

NEBR. 

MO. 

OKLA. 

MONT. 

WIS. 

UTAH 
W.VA. 

S.DAK 
ARIZ. 












I 






I 


'/yy/y>y////////y////y///?i 




/yyy/yy/y////////// ////////7x 






1 


>////////y///yy/yyyyyy//yy yzyyyy/yM\ 

I 


w/yyyy/yyyvv/y/yyyyyy/yy/y/yAyyyyyyT TTA 




Absence of >the Father Because of Estrangement From Family 8/ 

For every 100 ADC families in which the father was dead, 96 families were 
assisted in which the father was absent because of estrangement from the 
family. ^/ In UO families, he had deserted or the parents were separated 
without c^ourt decree 5 in 30 , he was divorced or legally separated from the 
mother; and in 26, he was not married to the mother. The great variation 
among State agencies in policy and practice with respect to assisting families 
which were dependent for any of these reasons is reflected in the wide range 
in the relative numbers of such families assisted—from 33 North Carolina 
to 167 in Oklahoma (chart IX). 10/ Even wider ratnges are found in the number 
of families in the three subgroups—divorce, desertion, and unmarried. 


8/ See footnote 2, page 25. 

9 / Because of the relative uniformity among States in the acceptance of fami¬ 
lies in which the father is dead, interstate comparisons of families aided 
for reasons other than death will be based upon the number of families aided 
in which the father was dead rather than upon the total families aided. 

10 / See appendix table 23. 







































- 29 - 


Chart IX.—Fathers absent because of estrangement from 
family* per 100 fathers dead, ADC families, 
for l6 States, October 19U2 

NUMBER PER 100 FATHERS DEAD 

0 40 80 120 160 

N.C. 

ARIZ. 

MASS. 

WIS. 

S.DAK, 

W.VA. 

ARK. 

UTAH 
LA. 

MONT. 

MO. 

KANS. 

ILL. 

NEBR. 

D.C. 

OKLA. 


YZZZZZZZZZZZA 


777////////////////////7A 




^J//Z//Z////yZ///y//Z//7777A 




^jyyyyyyyyyy/yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy\ 


yyyy/yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyTTTT^ 


V7?yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy/77A 


v/yyyyyyy/yyyyyyyyyyyy/z/yy/yyy/777A 


'/yy/yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyzr/7777yyyA 


vyyyyy//yy77yyyyyyyyyyyyyyy/yyyyyyyyyyyyyyy\ 


zzzj2zjzz/zz2zyyyyyyyyyyyy/-y?y77yz/y/7yyzzm 


vyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyT/7777/7yyyyyyyyyyyyy7777A 


yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyx 


vyyy//yy/y7/yyyyyyyyyyyyyy/yy//yyyyy//yy/ZZ/y/y///yyyyyy7ZZ/yA 


I 


vyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy7yyyyyyyyy/yy/yyy\ 


• Includes divorce, desertion, seoaratlon, and the father not married to the mother. 


Divorce and legal separation .—The relative number of ADC families in 
which the father was divorced or legally separated from the mother ranged from 
5 in North Carolina to 66 in Oklahoma (chart X). 11 / Only slight differences 
among States may be attributed to variations in the incidence of divorce and 
legal separation in their general populations. The range in the proportion of 
all families with wife present, in which the husband and wife were divorced, 
was from 0.6 percent in North Carolina to 2,k percent in the District of 
Columbia. Oklahoma was next highest, with 1.9 percent. 12 / 

In some States no specific period of time need elapse after a divorce 
decree has been granted before eligibility for aid to dependent children may 
be established, while in other States periods ranging from 3 months to a year 
are required. In one State, if the father fails to pay alimony awarded by the 
court and the mother is unwilling to institute legal proceedings for its pay- 


11/ See appendix table 23. 

I?/ Bureau of the Census, 19U0 population. It should be noted that these per- 
centages are based on all families with wife present, including those 
v/ithout children. The range for families with children undoubtedly would 
be even smaller. Also, divorces do not include legal separations. 












































- 30 - 


Chart X.—Fathers absent .because of.estrangement from family, per 100 fathers 
dead, by type of estrangement, ADC families, for 16 States, October 1942 


DIVORCE OR LEGAL SEPARATION 


N.C. 

W.VA. 


D.C. 

LA. 

ARIZ. 

ILL. 

ARK. 

MASS. 

WIS. 

S. DAK. 

MO. 

KANS. 

MONT. 

UTAH 

NEBR. 

OKLA. 


sa 


V//////7X 














>ZZZZZZ/ZZZZ//////////ZA 


^ZZZZZZ//Z//ZZZZZZZZZZ/ 7A 


>ZZZZZZZZZ/ZZZ/////Z/Z//?/7X 


^ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ//777i 


>ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ/ZZ//ZZZZZZZ/A 


DESERTION OR SEPARATION WITHOUT COURT DECREE 


N.C. 

WIS. 

S.DAK. 

MASS. 

UTAH 

ARIZ. 

'N.Wk. 

ARK. 

MONT. 

MO. 

LA. 

KANS. 

OKLA. 

NEBR. 

ILL. 

D.C. 


v/z/zZ/ZX 


ZZZZZZZZTi 


7ZZZZZZL 


ZZZZZZZzzTTi 


ZZZZZZZZ/zz77\ 


Z/ZZZZZZZZ/ZZ\ 


ZZZZZZZZZZZz///ZaZX 


ZZZZZZ/////ZZZZZ/ZZ7A 


\'ZZZZZZZZZZZZ//////A 


ZZZZZZZZZZ/Z//y////y/A 


VZZZZZZZZZ///////////A 


ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ/ZA 


ZZZZZZZZZ//Z/ZZZZ/ZZ////777X 


7ZZZZZZZZZ 


^zzzzzzzzzzzzzzm 


ZZZZZZZZZZzZZZ ZZZZZZZ/ZZ///Z77A 


/ZZZZZZZZZZ/ZZZZZZZZZZ//ZZ ZZZZZZZZ///ZzzzzzZ//X 


FATHER NOT MARRIED TO MOTHER 


UTAH 

MASS. 

N.C. 

S.DAK. 

MONT. 

ARIZ. 

WIS. 

KANS. 

ARK. 

NEBR. 

MO. 

W.VA. 

LA. 

ILL. 

OKLA. 

D.C. 


7ZZA 

TZZA 


TZZZZZA 


ZZZZZA 


V/ZZZ/l 


TVTTm 


ZZZZZZZZzzZA 


^ZZZZZZZZZZ/ZX 


>ZZZZ/Z/Z/Z/Zm 


ZZZZZZZZZZ///7A 


7ZZZZZZZZz zzzz/////X 


7ZZZZZ/Z///ZZZZZZZ/Z777\ 


ZZZZZZZZ/Z//ZZZZZZZZ/ZZ7 7 A 


NUMBER PER 100 FATHERS DEAD 


20 40 60 80 

NUMBER PER 100 FATHERS DEAD 


0 20 40 

NUMBER PER 100 FATHERS DEAD 


payment, the amount of alimony is considered as a resource in determining need 
and the amount of assistance. In some other States, the child of a divorced 
father \vho is able-bodied is not eligible for aid unless the mother is unable 
by law to compel her former husband to support the child. 

Desertion or separation vriLthout court "decree .—^Among families receiving 
aid to dependent children the number of fathers who had deserted or were 
separated from the mother without legal sanction per 100 fathers dead ranged 
from 18 in North Carolina to 93 in the District of Columbia. The next highest 
rate was 62 in Illinois (chart X). 13/ In the population as a 7;hole, the 
range in the proportion of families having a vdfe present and the husband 
absent was from 1.0 in Vi/isconsin to 5.2 in the District of Columbia. The next 
highest viras 3*3 in Louisiana, li;/ With the possible exception of the 


13/ See appendix table 23. 

m/ Bureau of the Census, 19U0 population. These percentages are based on all 
families, including those without children. “Husband absent” includes 
husbands who are legally separated from their wives but not divorced, who 
are in institutions, or whose residence is not the same as their wives, 
such as soldiers, sailors, and men in labor camps. Except for the Dis¬ 
trict of Columbia, it is assumed that the inclusion of these other 
absences makes little difference in the relative proportion of families 
with husband deserting or separated without court decree. 



















































































































- 31 - 


District of Columbia, there appears to be little, if any, correlation between 
abiSence of fathers in the general population and in ADC families. State 
differences in policy and practice in determining eligibility in cases of 
desertion and informal separation seem to have more effect in determining the 
relative number of ADC families in which children are deprived of support or 
care for this reason than the incidence of such absences in the population. 

In cases of desertion in the District of Columbia, absence from the home 
must have been continuous for at least 1 month before the payment is approved, 
with the probability of continuing for 3 months thereafter. At the other 
extreme, in Wisconsin, the record must show abandonment to have been for a 
period of 1 year, and the filing of a warrant must be verified through the 
official who issued it. In South Dakota, which had the second lowest relative 
number of fathers who had deserted or were separated by mutual agreement, 
desertion must be verified by obtaining sworn documents from three disinter¬ 
ested individuals, such as businessmen, professional men, clergymen, or city- 
officials. 

State policies and practices vary in insisting that legal steps must have 
been taken to try to compel parental support and oh the length of time which 
must elapse sufter desertion before aid is given. The time varies from no 
specified period up to a year, with 6 months the most usual requirement. 

Father not married to the mother .—For every 100 ADC families in which 
the father was dead, the number in which the father was not married to the 
mother ranged from 8 in Utah to 53 in the District of Columbia. The next 
highest rate was U8 in Oklahoma (cliart X). l5/ Comparative da-ba on the inci¬ 
dence of illegitimacy are not available, but it may safely be assumed that 
illegitimacy, like desertion and separation without court decree, is highest 
in States where large proportions of the population are socially or economi¬ 
cally disadvantaged. State differences in the extent of illegitimacy are not 
sufficient, however, to account for the wide range in the relative number of 
ADC families in which the mother is unmarried. It is evident that in many 
States moral attitudes make it more difficult for needy illegitimate children 
•bo get assistance than for children dependent for other reasons. 

State policies and practices concerning the length of time an unmarried 
father must have deserted vary as much as for a married deserting father. 
Policies and practices also vary in the pressures exerted to establish pater¬ 
nity. Furthermore, although the State plan may specifically provide that 
illegitimate children are eligible for aid, restrictive practices in some 
local agencies result in the acceptance of few children of unmarried mothers. 

Incapacity of the Father 

Incapacity was a less frequent reason for dependency among families 
receiving aid in the fall of 19U2 than either of the other reasons specified 
by the Social Security Act. The father was incapacitated in 22 percent of 
the families—in 19 percent he was living in the home and in 3 percent he was 
receiving care elsewhere. 16 / 


15/ See appendix table 23* 
16/ See appendix table 22, 








- 32 - 


Under mothers* aid, some States authorized aid for children whose fathers 
were physically or mentally incapable of earning a living, but in popular 
conception and in actual practice mothers' aid w^as extended in large part only 
to widows. Consequently, there has been less experience with incapacity as a 
basis of eligibility for a special type of aid than with death or continued 
absence. Furthermore, determining loss of support or care because of inca¬ 
pacity presents certain problems not encountered in determining eligibility 
for other reasons. It is not surprising, therefore, to find great diversity 
among States in defining deprivation of support or care because of incapacity 
as an eligibility requirement for aid to dependent children. These differ¬ 
ences in interpretation naturally result in great dissimilarity among States 
in the relative number of ADC families with an incapacitated father. For 
every 100 ADC families deprived of support because of the father's death, the 
number deprived of support because of his incapacity ranged from 31 in Illi¬ 
nois to 110 in West Virginia. In 6 States the number with an incapacitated 
father was less than halfj in 7 States, from three-fifths to somewhat more 
than four-fifths; and in 3 States, more than the number in which the father 
was dead (chart XI). 17 / 


Chart XI.—Incapacitated fathers per 100 fathers dead, ADC 
families, for 16 States, October 19k2 

NUMBER PER 100 FATHERS DEAD 

0 20 40 60 80 100 120 

ILL. 

MASS. 

NX. 

S.DAK, 

WIS. 

D.C. 

ARIZ. 

KANS. 

OKLA. 

MO. 

MONT. 

ARK. 

NEBR. 

LA. 

UTAH 
W.VA. 


















I I 






AT HOME 

\'///\ ELSEWHERE 






17/ See appendix table 23. 












































- 33 - 


Some differences among States in the relative number of ADC families in 
which the father is incapacitated may be attributed to differences in the 
prevalence of incapacity in the population. The health of the population is 
affected by many factors which vary from State to State, among them social and 
economic conditions, degree of urbanization, major types of industry, the 
extent of public health activities, facilities for medical care, and so on. 

The census shows, for each State, the proportion of males aged I4 years and 
over who in March I9U0 were unable to work because of permanent disability, 
chronic illness, or old age, and who were not in institutions for medical care 
or treatment. V/hile the amount of disabling illness would probably be differ¬ 
ent for married men with children, these data afford an index of variations 
that might be expected among States. In the 2 States having the lowest pro¬ 
portion of incapacitated males in the population, this fact may partly explain 
their also having a low proportion of ADC families with an incapacitated 
father in the home. Among the other 14 States, however, the range in the 
proportion of incapacitated males was very small (5.8 to 7*4 percent) and the 
position of .the States within that range appears to have little, if any, 
effect on the proportion of ADC families having an incapacitated father. It 
may be assumed, therefore, that most of the disparity among States in the 
relative number of families receiving aid because the father is incapacitated 
results from differences in policy and practice in determining eligibility 
with respect to incapacity. 

State definitions of physical and mental incapacity in determining 
eligibility for aid vary in many respects. A State may have a relatively 
liberal policy in one respect but be restrictive in another. Moreover, lack 
of specific instructions on certain points in the plan and procedural material 
of, many States may result in a variety of practice in local units within the 
States. The following illustrations indicate the wide range in policy or 
practice of the ‘'6 States with respect to some of the factors involved in 
determining incapacity as a factor in eligibility. 18 / 

(a) Degree of incapacity: In South Dakota, children deprived of support 
or care because of the incapacity of a parent receive aid to dependent children 
only if the parent is totally, and relatively permanently, incapacitated. In 
West Virginia, on the other hand, incapacity is defined to cover realistically 
all cases of dependency resulting from a parent's incapacity, irrespective of 
the nature or degree of incapacity. Emphasis is placed upon the dependency 
resulting from the physical or mental incapacity of the wage earner, rather 
than upon the degree of incapacity. Although the provisions of another State 
iii5)Ose no restrictions on eligibility because of the degree of incapacity, the 
general lack of awareness of the implications of health problems on the part 
of local agencies results in their determining incapacity largely in terms of 
employability. As a consequence, needy children who are actually lacking 
support or care ly reason of incapacity may be deprived of aid to dependent 
children. FurthenoDre, this emphasis may deny assistance at a time when its 


18/ The illustrations of policy are taken from State plan material, and the 
— illustrations of practice from the reports of the administrative review by 
the staff of the Social Security Board. The illustrations of neither 
policy nor practice are necessarily the most restrictive or the most 
liberal to be found in the I6 States, and similar policies and practices 
may obtain in States which are not mentioned. 



- 3U - 


provision would help to reduce the duration or the extent of the parent’s 
incapacity and thus prevent long-time dependency for the family. 

Other restrictions, closely related, to degree, are placed on incapacity 
as an eligibility requirement by some States. According to policy, children 
whose parents have certain disabilities which can be improved by operative 
care or treatment are generally not eligible for aid in Nebraska and South 
Dakota. Both States sa-y that in practice the application of this policy is 
restricted to cases of hernia. The South Dakota manual states that obtaining 
remedial treatment in these cases is considered the responsibility of the 
family. 

South Dakota also refuses aid to dependent children in cases in which 
sanatorium care has been recommended but is refused by the patient; and a 
child whose parent is mentally incapacitated is eligible for aid only if the 
parent is institutionalized. 

(b) Time limitations: Children whose parents are temporarily incapaci¬ 
tated are ineligible for aid in Wisconsin unless the incapacity is expected to 
continue for a year. In other States, the required duration of incapacity 
varies from 3 to 6 months. 

A few States permit the continuation of payments during a period of 
observation, usually not longer than three months, after the apparent dis¬ 
appearance of incapacity follovring treatment, in order to be assured that 
incapacity no longer exists. 

(c) Provisions for medical and psychiatric examinations: In some States 
the public assistance agency arranges and pays for medical or psychiatric 
examinations, while others hold it more or less the responsibility of the 
applicant to obtain the required physician’s statement. In some local units, 
lack of medical facilities sometimes renders it difficult to establish inca¬ 
pacity and restricts the number of cases based on this eligibility requirement. 
North Carolina requires a notarized statement by the physician attesting to 
unemployability. Physicians are reluctant to give such statements. In some 
local agencies in another State the statement of the applicant, without a 
physician’s report, is sufficient to establish his incapacity. 

(d) Responsibility for determining eligibility: Some agencies rely 
entirely on the physician’s statement as a means of determining eligibility 
with respect to incapacity rather than consider the medical statement as part 
of the evidence on which they make a decision. The final responsibility for 
determining whether needy children are dependent because of the parent’s 
incapacity, although properly the agency’s function, is thereby placed on the 
physician. 

(e) Consideration of other factors: Some States specify that social, 
psychological, and occupational factors, as well as the report of medical 
findings, should be taken into account in reaching a decision about the inca¬ 
pacity of'a parent, though they differ in evaluating these factors. Other 
States ignore some of these factors entirely. For example, job opportunities 
are not considered in Illinois. If a partially incapacitated parent is 
capable of performing certain jobs, even though such jobs are not available 
in the community, he is considered unemployed, rather than incapacitated, and 




- 35 - 


the children are therefore ineligible for aid to dependent children. Both 
the tendency to transfer to the physician the responsibility for determining 
eligibility with respect to incapacity and the failure to consider other 
factors may be attributed at least in part to the fact that in some States the 
instructions for determining eligibility in cases of incapacity deal only with 
the physiciq^i's report. 

(f) Deprivation of care: In at least three States cases of physical or 
mental incapacity are eligible for aid 'to dependent children only when the 
breadwinner is disabled. Consequently, some needy families in which the 
mother is incapacitated are ineligible for aid. V/hile other States do not 
specifically.prohibit aid in such cases, as is shown later, many States give 
aid to very few children, if any, who have been deprived of the mother's care 
because of her incapacity. 

Lack of Support or Care by the Father for Reasons Other 
Than Death, Estrangement From Family, and Incapacity 

Information on the reasons for lack of parental support or care was based 
on the status of the parent with whom the child vfas living or last lived. For 
the majority of fathers, the status corresponds with a reason for deprivation 
of support or care specified in the Social Security Act and presumably, in 
most cases, with the reason from which the eligibility of the children stems. 
Ninety-five percent of the families were deprived of the father's support or 
care for one of the reasons thus far discussed—death, continued absence 
because of estrangement from the family, and incapacity. The reasons for lack 
of support or care by the father in the remaining 5 percent of the families 
were as follows: 19/ 


Reason for lack of support or care by the father, Percent of 

other than death, estrangement from family, or incapacity families 


Ibtal. U.9 


No t in the home. 3*1 

Imprisoned. 2.0 

Serving in armed forces. •h 

Absent for other reason. .7 

In the home. 

Unemployed or with insufficient earnings. 1.0 

Not legally responsible. *5 

Needed in the home. *2 

Support or care not lacking. .1 


For every 100 fathers dead, the support of 13 fathers was lacking for one 
of these minor reasons. The relative number ranged from 7 in Arkansas, 
Missouri, and South Dakota to 29 in Oklahoma. 20/ 


19/ For State data, see appendix table 22. 
20/ See appendix table 23. 



















- 36 - 


•Families in which the father was imprisoned or serving in the armed 
forces (2.U percent) would be eligible for aid to dependent children under the 
Social Security Act because of his continued absence, and those in which the 
stepfather was not legally responsible (0,5 percent) would likewise be eligi¬ 
ble, because the natural father was dead or continuously absent. Only 2 
percent of the ADC families thus remain in which the status of the father does 
not in itself indicate eligibility in terms of the Social Security Act. In 
more than half of these families the mother was either dead, continuously 
absent, or incapacitated. 21 / Lack of support or care according to the eli¬ 
gibility requirements of the Social Security Act therefore failed to be 
apparent from the status of either the father or the mother in less than 1 
percent of all families receiving aid. Only‘2 States had more than 2 percent 
of such families—2.2 and 2,8 percent. Seven States had between 1 and 2 
percent, and seven, less than 1 percent. 

The presence of these apparently ineligible children on the ADC rolls 
is to be expected for two reasons. At any time when a cross section is taken 
of an assistance case load, some ineligible persons will be found if the 
sample is representative. One purpose of a' periodic reinvestigation of cases 
is to discontinue assistance to persons who have become ineligible as a result 
of changed circumstances. Of necessity, there is some lag between the time 
when changed conditions make a person ineligible for aid and the time when he 
ceases to receive aid. Moreover, State programs of aid to dependent children 
may and do assist some children ineligible under the Social Security Act for 
whom reimbursement is not claimed. 

Imprisoned .—In 2 percent of the families receiving aid to dependent 
children the father was unable to provide support because he was imprisoned. 
The number of fathers imprisoned w^as 5 per 100 fathers dead and ranged from 2 
in Arkansas to l5 in the District of Columbia. The next highest number was 
9 in West Virginia. Part of the difference among States in the relative 
number of imprisoned fathers is the result of lack of uniformity in the length 
of sentence required to establish the fact that‘a child has been deprived of 
support or care. Ihis varies from no specified time up to a year. 

Serv i ng in armed forces .—Only O.U percent of the fathers in ADC families 
were serving in the armed forces. Ihe number of such fathers per 100 fathers 
dead was 1 and ranged from none in Oklahoma and Wisconsin to 6 in Montana. 

Most of these families were receiving aid to dependent children temporarily 
while awaiting the first payment under the Servicemen’s Dependents Allowance 
Act. A fev/ families may have been receiving aid to supplement dependents' 
allowances. Since the time of the study, the Servicemen's Dependents Allow¬ 
ance Act has been amended to shorten the time between induction of the 
serviceman and issuance of the first allowance check to his dependents and to 
increase the amount of the allowance for families with children. 

Absent for other reasons .—In less than 1 percent of the families the 
father was absent from the home for reasons not specified. Ihese cases 
include those in which the father is living away from home because of employ¬ 
ment or for any other reason not previously mentioned. The number per 100 


21/ Reason for lack of support or care by the mother, according to status of 
the father, by State, is shown in appendix table 2^. 







- 37 


dead was 2 and ranged from less than 1 in Missouri to 6 in Utah. In almost 
three-fourths of these families the mother was dead, absent, or incapacitated. 

Unemployed or with insufficient earnings .—Less than 2 percent of all 
fathers were at home and not incapacitated. More than half of these were 
classified as unemployed or with insufficient earnings. The number of fathers 
unemployed or with insufficient earnings was 3 per 100 fathers dead, ranging 
from none in South Dakota to 9 per 100 in Oklahoma. In more than two-fifths 
of the families in which unemployment or insufficient earnings was given as 
the reason for lack of support by the father, the mother was dead, absent, or 
incapacitated; and in about one-fifth, the father was a stepparent. 

Incapacity in Relation to Absence 


Using as a base the number of ADC families in which the father was dead, 
the distributions of the relative number of families with the father inca¬ 
pacitated and with the father absent indicate that the l6 States differ 
greatly in the extent to which they were using the provisions of the Social 
Sec\irity Act with respect to children deprived of support or care for each 
of these reasons. Have the States which have more fully utilized the inca¬ 
pacity provisions taken equal advantage of the absence provisions? As shown 
by the following analysis, there is no uniformity among the 16 States in the 
relationship between the importance of incapacity and of absence as reasons 
for dependency. 

Of the 6 States with the lowest relative number of families with an 
incapacitated father, k also had a relatively low, and 2 a high, number of 
families with the father absent. 22 / Of the 6 States approximating the aver¬ 
age in number of incapacitated fathers, 1 had a low, U near the average, and 
1, a high number of fathers absent. Of the States with the highest relative 
number of incapacitated fathers, 3 had approximately the average, and only 1 
a high, number of fathers absent. 

Lack of Support or Care by the Mother 

The mother's death, incapacity, or absence from the home was a factor 
in the dependency of only a little more than one-sixth of the ADC families. 

In three-fifths of the families the mother was considered to be needed full 
time in the home, and in more than one-fifth of the families the mother was 
classified as unemployed or with insufficient earnings. 23 / As sho7m by the 
following table, incapacity ranked next to death as a reason for lack of 
care by the mother and, unlike the corresponding reasons for lack of support 
by the father, absence of the mother because of estrangement from the family 
was a much less important reason for lack of care than her incapacity. 


22/ The States were classified by dividing the total range for each of these 
reasons into three equal parts; the middle third of the range was con¬ 
sidered "average." 

^/ For State data, see appendix table 2U. 







- 38 - 


Percent of 

Reason for lack of support or care by the mother families 


All reasons. 100.0 


Mot in the home.... 11.2 

Dead.^. 6.8 

Incapacitated. .7 

Estranged from family.;. 2.3 

Absent for other reasons... ' l.U 

In the home. 88.8 

Needed in the home... 60.1 

Unemployed or with insufficient earnings. 22.7 

incapacitated. 5.9 

Other reason. *1 


Needed in the home and unemployed or with insufficient earnings . —ViThen 
the mother was not actually employed, the judgment that she was in the labor 
force was that of the worker in the agency carrying the case. -According to 
instructions for the study, mothers were not to be reported as being in the 
labor force if they were not employed and were needed full time in the home to 
care for the children or for other family members who were too old or too dis¬ 
abled to care for themselves, or if the mothers were needed full time in the 
home to perform household tasks. A mother not actually employed was to be 
reported as available for work only if the children were deemed to be old or 
mature enough to look after themselves while the mother worked or it was 
believed that some other suitable arrangement could be made for their care. , . 
In some families, another adult was in the home and could assume responsi¬ 
bility for the children. 

The mother was needed full time in the home more often when the father 
was in the home than when he was absent. The percent of ADC families deprived 
of the mother’s support or care for specified reason, according to whether or 
not the father was in the home, was as follows: 



Total 

Father 

Father not 


families 

in home 

in home 

Needed full time in home. 


77.7 

55.U ■ 

Unemployed or with insufficient earnings 22.7 

9.8 

26.2 

Other reason. 

.. 17.2 

12.5 

18.U 

Although sometimes an 

incapacitated father may be 

able to 

supervise the 


children while the mother is at work, generally the presence of an incapaci¬ 
tated father in the home makes it more important for the mother to remain full 
time in the home. Also, the larger number of children in these homes would 
make it necessary for more mothers to devote full time to home duties. The 
average number of dependent children per family was 3.1 when the father was 
in the home, in contrast to 2.3 when he was absent. 

Individual States differ v/idely in the extent to which mothers were 
classified as needed full time in'the home (chart XII). In Massachusetts, 
Utah, and YIest Virginia, more than 9 of every 10 mothers who lived at home and 

























- 39 - 


were able-bodied were considered to. be needed full time in the home. On the 
other hand, in the District of Columbia, Arkansas, and North Carolina, only 
about 5 of every 10 such mothers were judged to be needed full time at home. 

Chart XII.—Reason for lack of support by the mother in ADC 
families with nonincapacitated mother in home, 
for 16 States, October 19k2 

PERCENT 

0 20 40 60 80 100 


W.VA. 

MASS. 

UTAH 

LA. 

ILL. 

KANS. 

ARIZ. 

MO. 

OKLA. 

NEBR. 

MONT. 

S.DAK. 

WIS. 

N.C. 

ARK. 

D.C. 


UNEMPLOYED OR WITH INSUFFICIENT EARNINGS Y///X NEEDED IN THE HOME 

The great range among States in the proportion of mothers who were 
reported as unemployed or with insufficient earnings indicates that the 
practices in some States encourage many mothers who would be considered as 
needed in the home in other States to supplement the family income by work¬ 
ing. Undoubtedly the smallness of the assistance payment has forced some of 
these mothers to accept employment. The fact that in some States a consider¬ 
able proportion of the mothers receiving aid were v/orking or seeking v.^ork also 
suggests that, v/ithout due consideration of its effect on the welfare of the 
children, other mothers were probably denied or dissuaded from applying for 
assistance because they were considered employable. 

The importance of permitting mothers with young children to remain in 
the home has been recognized in national wartime policy. Despite acute labor 
shortages, the policy adopted by the V/ar Manpower Commission is that "no woman 
responsible for the care of young children should be encouraged or compelled 
to seek employment which deprives her children of her essential care until 
after all other sources of labor supply have'been exhausted." 2 I 4 ./ 



'^^^^7777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777. 

1 1 1 1 

'^^^7777777777777777777777777777777777/7777777777777777777777777777777/ 

1 1 1 1 

m7^7m7777777777777777777V7V7777777V777r7V77777V777V77V7777777y7777777777. 

till 

W^7^^^V777V77V777777777777V77V7V777V7y777/7777777V777777777777777777y 

1 1 1 1 

77^^7^^^^^^M77777777V777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777 

1 r 1 1 

'7777^7^W^7^^^^W7777V7777777777V7V77777777777V77777777777777777777/ 

1 1 1 1 


1 1 1 1 

^^7^^7^^^^^^^^rV7777777777777V77777777777777777777777777777777/ 

1 1 1 1 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777. 

till 

'^^^^^^^^^^^^^^77777777777777777777777777777777777777777777777/ 

1 1 1 1 

’^777^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^777777777777777V7V777V777777V77V77V7V77V7V7V7777 

1 1 1 1 

77^^7^^^^^^^!^^77777777777777777777V7V77777777777777777777777/ 

1 1 1 1 

99S6SS6SS6>9S66S666666^$S6666/S>6!$97$7S^/// ////////////// /////////////////////7///// 

till 

'7^7^77777^^^^^7^^^^^M^7^777777777777777V7V777777777777777777777^ 

1 1 1 1 

'^7^^’'^^^^^^^^^^^^^W777777777777777777777777777777777777/ 

1 1 1 1 


_1_^^^_ 


2l| / Directive No. IX, issued August 12, 19^2. 







































Dead, incapacita t ed, or absent for other reason .—While 17 percent of the 
families were deprived of the mother's support or care because of her death, 
incapacity’', or absence, more than 93 percent of these families were also 
deprived of the father's support or care. 25/ Approximately 1 percent of all 
families were dependent primarily because deprived of the mother's care. 

A mother can usually manage to keep the children with her if the, father's 
function of support is assumed by the Agency. It may be more difficult to 
find a substitute for the mother's care vfhen she is absent or incapacitated. 

In some instances, however, supplementing the father's earnings by assistance 
enables him to purchase the services a mother would perform and thereby main¬ 
tain a home for his children. The influence of the old mothers'-aid philos¬ 
ophy is apparent in the reluctance of many States to give aid to dependent 
children to fathers whose children have been deprived of a mother's care. 

In every 1,000 families receiving aid in Oklahoma, there were 26 in which 
the mother's death, incapacity, or absence was the chief reason for need 
(father was in the home and not incapacitated). In 11 of the other l5 States 
(chart XIII), the corresponding rate was less than 5 per 1,000. 

Chart XIII.—ADC families dependent primarily because of lack 
of care by the mother,* for l6 S'bates, October 19k2 

NUMBER PER 1,000 FAMILIES AIDED 

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 


OKLA. 

NEBR, 

KANS. 

MONT. 

ARIZ. 

ARK. 

N.C. 

UTAH 

ILL. 

MO. 

LA. 

W.VA. 

D.C. 

MASS. 

WIS. 

S.DAK. 


* Nonlncapacltated father In the home; mother dead, Incapacitated, or absent for other reason. 



25 / Reason for lack of support or care by the father, according to status of 
the mother, by State, is shown in appendix table 26. 





































VII. CONCLUSIONS 


Analysis of the characteristics of families receiving aid to dependent 
children in l6 States in the fall of 1942 indicates some respects in which, 
under the existing provisions of the Social Security Act, States could aid' 
more needy children and more effectively serve children already receiving aid. 

1. In some States, aid to dependent children is frequently not available 
to all children who are eligible to receive it under the State plan. For 
example: 

(a) Practices in the administration of aid to dependent children in some 
States apparently result in assistance to fewer Negro and Indian children than 
white children in relation to the number of needy children in the respective 
populations. The disparity among the 16 States in the proportion of Negro and 
Indian children receiving aid is far too great to be explained by differences 
among States in the extent of need aroong children of these minority groups. 
Furthermore, a low recipient rate for Negro or Indian children is not always 
explained by a generally restricted program in the State; it occurs in some 
States with a relatively high recipient rate for white children. 

(b) The relatively small proportion of one-child families receiving aid 
suggests a tendency to reject such cases in at least one of the 16 States. 

2. In several States, certain needy children fail to receive aid because 
by law, policy, or practice, some eligibility requirements of the State 
program are narrower than those specified for Federal matching under the 
Social Security Act. For example: 

(a) The wide discrepancy among the l6 States in the number of families 
receiving aid to dependent children that were deprived of parental support 
or care because if incapacity indicates that many children who are dependent 
for this reason were not receiving this type of aid. Although the Federal 
act places no conditions on incapacity as a factor in eligibility, for admin¬ 
istrative purposes it is important for States to define this factor specif¬ 
ically. Some State plans, however, require an undue degree or duration of 
incapacity, or otherwise restrict eligibility in such cases. Tlie provisions 
of some other States are so general that in practice their application may be 
equally limited. 

(b) Similarly, a more limited interpre.tation of what constitutes lack 
of parental support or care because of absence results in some States' deny¬ 
ing aid to dependent children to certain children who would be eligible for 
this type of aid in other States. In such cases, eligibility is restricted 
by a requirement that the absence shall have continued as long, as a year or 
that legal steps have been taken to try to con^^el parental support. 

*(c) In some States, the relatively small proportion of fathers receiving 
aid on behalf of dependent children deprived of the care of the mother may 
indicate failure to recognize deprivation of care as an eligibility factor 
when support is not lacking. A father who ordinarily would be able to support 


- Ill - 



- U2 - 


his family may be unable to maintain a home for his children if services to 
substitute for the mother’s care must be purchased. 

(d) The Social Security Act provides for aid to children who are other¬ 
wise eligible up to age l6 and to age l8 if they are attending school. In 
6 of the l6 States, children over 16 years were ineligible for aid whether or 
not they were in school; in 1 State, school attendance was a requirement for 
children ll; and l5 years of age. 

3. The findings of the study suggest the following ways in which the 
program could be made more effective: 

(a) The right of mothers to choose aid rather than employment v>rhen 
employment will result in neglect or inadequate care of the children is 
implicit in the objectives of the program and conforms with the employment 
policy of the War Manpower Commission. The large proportion of mothers in 
some States who were working or were judged to. be available for work seems to 
indicate, however, that the agencies encouraged some mothers who had young 
children and vfere needed full time in the home to seek employment. Higher 
assistance payments are a prerequisite to releasing mothers from employment 
when they are needed in the home. 

(b) Making the father the payee whenever possible helps to uphold his 
status in the family. The infrequency of payee fathers in some States 
suggests that the desirability of this practice may not always have been 
considered. 

(c) Determining the eligibility of all children in families in which 
any child receives aid to dependent children, and certifying them for aid if 
eligible, contribute to good administration of the program. The practice in 
some States of failing to approve large numbers of eligible children in fami¬ 
lies receiving aid has concealed important facts about the program—the number 
of children for whom aid was intended and the amount of assistance per child. 
This situation makes it difficult to evaluate the program and to justify the 
need for additional funds, and thus directly affects the children who are 
receiving aid. 

By modifying the laws, policies, and practices that deny aid to children 
who. are eligible under the Social Security Act and adversely affect the chil¬ 
dren who are receiving aid. States can realize more fully the objectives of 
the act's provisions for aid to dependent children. 





APPENDIX 


- 44 - 


TaM* of uuaplo and nonth to idiich data relate, study of 

aid to dependent ohlldren in l6 States, 19^> ^7 State 


State 

Sampling 

proportion 

Humber scheduled 

Humber represented 
by sample ij 

Month 
to tdilch 
data relate, 

1942 

Families 

Children 

Families 

Ohlldren 

Total. 

.. 

42,300 

103.433 

138,060 

331.940 






irlsona. 

-^'3 

1.377 

3.738 

2,066 

5.607 

October 

Arkansas. 

2/5 

2,407. 

6,262 

6,018 

15.655 

October 

District of Columbia 

all 

1,029 

3,159 

1.029 

3.159 

October 

Illinois. 

1/6 

3.776 

8,525 

22,656 

51.150 

September 

Kansas. 

2/5 

2,44o 

6,119 

6,100 

15.298 

October 

Louisiana. 

1/4 

3.412 

8,745 

13,648 

34.980 

October 

Massachusetts. 

1/4 

2,627 

6,234 

10,508 

24.936 

October 

Missouri. 

1/8 

1,687 

3.967 

13.833 

32.529 

October 

Montana. 

all 

2,283 

5.731 

2,283 

5.731 

October 

Hebraska. 

H 1/2 

4,922 

11,274 

4,922 

11.274 

September 

North Carolina.. 

1/3 

3.179 

7.371 

9.537 

22,113 

October 

Oklahoma. 

1/6 

3.095 

7,016 

18,570 

42,096 

October 

South Dakota.... 

all 

1,84o 

4,336 

1,84o 

4,336 

September 

Utah.. 

all 

2,6l8 

6,916 

2,6l8 

6,916 

October 

West Virginia.'.'. 

1/4 

3,016 

8,102 

12,064 

32,408 

October 

Wisconsin. 

1/4 

2,592 

5.938 

10,368 

23,752 

September 


^ ?or rarloue reasons, these Inflated totals do not correspond exactly vith the number of 
families and children reported as reeelTln^ aid In surrey month. 

2/ Since only l/>4 of Souclas County oases were sampled, the proportion was only 4$ peroent. 


Table 2.—Bace of population under a^e 18 for l6 States, 1^40 census 


State 

Population 
under 
age 18 

Percent 

of epeelfled race 


White 

Honwhlte 

Total 

Hegro 

Indian 

1/ • 

All 

other 

Total...,. 

11,708,390 

88.1 

11.9 

11.1 

0.8 

(2) 

Arlsona. 

182,723 

82.7 

• 17.3 

2.3 

14.5 

0.5 

Arkansas.'... 

727.726 

75.0 

25.0 

25.0 

' (2) 

(2) 

District of Columbia 

145,403 

65.0 

35.0 

34.7 

.1 

.2 

Illinois. 

2,103.511 

.94.9 

5.1 

5.0 

. (2) 

.1 

Ksasas. 

540,779 

96.4 

3.6 

3.5 

.1 


Louisiana. 

846,011 

61.6 

38.4 

38.2 

.1 

.1 

Massachusetts. 

1,169,601 

98.5 

1.5 

1.4 

(2) 

.1 

Missouri...,. 

1.085,679 

93.7 

6.3 

6,3 

(2) 

(2) 

Montana. 

171,967 

95.0 

5.0 

.1 

4.7 

.2 

Hebraska. 

407,090 

98.6 

1.4 

.9 

. .4 

.1 

Horth Carolina. 

1,402,824 

69.4 

30.6 

29.8 

.8 

(2) 

Oklahoma. 

827,953 

89.3 

10.7 

7.4 

3.3 

(2) 

South Ikikota. 

217,223 

95.0 

5.0 

.1 

4.9 

(2) 

Utah. 

207,831 

98.5 

1.5 

.1 

.9 

.5 

West Virginia. 

718,360 

94.3 

5.7 

5.7 

(2) 

(2) 

Wisconsin. 

953.709 

99.0 

1.0 

.4 

.6 

(2) 


}J Humber of Indians under a«;e 18 estimated for 8 States (Arkansas, 
District of Columbia, Illinois, Kansas, Louisiana, Massachusetts, 
Missouri, and Vest Virginia). 

2/ Less than 0.05 percent. 






























































. 45 - 


T»41* 3>—of ehildron approrod for aid to da^ndaat ohlldraa, 
for l6 Statoa, Ootobor 1942 


Stata 

Chlldran 
approrad 
fdr aid 

Psreant 

of spaelflad raea 


Whlta 

lonwhlta 

Total 

Macro 

Indian 

All 

othar 

Total. 

331. g'w 

78,6 

21.4 

20.1 

1.3 

( 1 ) 

Arlsona. 

5.607 

95.6 

4.4 

3.8 

. .2 

.4 

Arkansas. 

15.655 

7'v.4 

25,6 

25.6 



D1 strict of Oolunbla 

3.159 

15.2 

84.8 

84.8 



Illinois. 

51.150 

65.4 

34.6 

34.6 



Kansas. 

15,293 

83.9 

16.1 

15.9 

.2 


Louisiana. 

3 U .930 

57.9 

42.1 

41.9 

.1 

.1 

Nasssichusetts. 

24,936 

94.9 

5.1 

5.0 

.1 


Missouri. 

32,5J^9 

82.0 

18.0 

18,0 

( 1 ) 


Montana. 

5.731 

83.4 

16.6 

.4 

16.1 

.1 

Kabraska. 

11.274 

89.7 

10.3 

7.9 

2.0 

.4 

Horth Carolina. 

22.113 

73.7 

26.3 

25.8 

.5 


Oklahoaa. 

42,096 

74.3 

25.7 

20.9 

4.8 


South Dakota. 

4,336 

90.7 

9 . 3 . 

.4 

8.9 


Utah. 

6,916 

99.4 

.6 

.1 

.5 

(1) 

VIsat Tlr^lnla. ..... 

32,408 

93.7 

6,3 

6.3 



Wisconsin. 

23^752 

96.1 

3.9 

1.4 

2.5 



\J Las* than 0.05 pareant. 


Tahla 4.—Chlldran raoalrln^; ADC ^ par 1,000 population 
undar a^e 18, bj raea, for l6 Statas; Ootobar 1942 


Ohildran raealrlnf ADC par 1,000 . 
population undar ac* 18 


Stata 

ill 

Whlta 

Monvhlta 

Total 

Macro 

All 

other 

Total . 

29 

25 

52 

52 

45 

Arlsona.\ 

31 

36 

8 

52 

1 

Arkansas. . 

22 

22 

22 

22 


Dlstrlot of Coluabla 

22 

5 

54 

54 


Illinois. 

25 

17 

171 

173 


Kansas. 

27 

24 

123 

125 

5« 

Louisiana. 

42 

39 

46 

46 

56 

Massacfausatts. 

22 

21 

73 

76 

25 ' 

Missouri.. 

29 

26 

84 

84 

33 

Montana. 

34 

30 

113 

104 

ll4 

Mobraska . 

27 

24 

198 

224 

i42 

forth Carolina. 

16 

17 

13 

l4 

10 

OklahoM. 

52 

44 

126 

148 

76 

South lUota . 

20 

19 

37 

137 

36 

Utah. 

35 


l4 

26 

13 

Wist Tlrclnla.. 

45 

V 

50 

50 ' 


WLsoonala. 

25 

24 

100 

95 

104 

_ 


ij Ohildran raportad as rsoalTln* ADO In Ootobar 1942 uara 
dlstrlbotad aooordlns to raea as In saapla studlad In 
ourra/ aonth. 














































































- 46 - 


■feble 5*—^Average number of persons, by aid status and age, 
ADC families, for l6 States, October 19U2 


Number per family 


State 

All 

persons 

Children 
approved 
for ADC 1/ 

Other than children 
approved for ADC 

TtoUl 

Under 18 
/ears 

l8 years 
and over 

Tbtal. 

k.5 

2.4 

2.1 

0.4 

1.7 

Arizona. 

4.9 

2.7 

2.2 

.5 

1.7 

Arkansas. 

4.5 

2.6 

J..9 

.3 

1.6 

District of Columbia. 

4.7 

3.1 

1.6 

.3 

1.3 

Illinois. 

4.1 

2.3 

1.8 

.2 

1.6 

Kansas... 

4.2 

2.5 

1.7 

.2 

1.5 

Louisiana. 

4.7 

2.5 

2.2 

.4 

1.8 

Mas sachusetts. 

4.1 

2.4 

1.7 

.2 

1.5 

Missouri. 

4.6 

2.4 ' 

2.2 

.5 

1.7 

Montana. 

4.2 

2.5 

1.7 

.2 

1.5 

Nebraska... 

4.4 

2.3 

2.1 

.4 

1.7 

North Carolina... 

4.9 

2.3 

2.6 

.8 

1.8 

Oklahoma. 

4.8 

2.3 

2.5 

.6 

1.9 

South Dakota.. 

4.3 

2.4 

1.9 

.3 

1.6 

Utah. 

4>4 

2.7 

1.7 

.1 

1.6 

West Virginia.. 

5.0 

2.7 

2.3 

.5 

1.8 

Wisconsin... 

4.3 

2.3 

2.0 

.2 

1.8 


1/ In 6 States (Arisona, District of Columbia, Missouri, Nebraska, Okla¬ 
homa, and South Dakota), the age limit for aid was 16 years; in Wiscon¬ 
sin, 21 years, but aiding children over l6 was optional with counties; 
in the other 9 States, 18 years. 


Table 6.—ADC families with persons of specified age, other than children 
approved for aid, parent(s) or relative in loco parentis, 
for 16 States, October 19U2 


State 

ADC 

familleB 

Percent with— 

No 

other 

person 

2/ 

Other person(i 

) 

Any other 
person 1/ 

Tbtal 

All 

under 18 
years or 

65 years 
and over 2/ 

Any 

other 

person 

18-64 

years 

Under 

18 

years 

y 

65 

years 

and 

over 

Tbtal. 

138,060 

51.6 

48.4 

16.8 

31.6 

25.4 

7.1 

Arise na.. 

2,066 

49.4 

50.6 

23.6 

27.0 

37.4 

3.3 

Arkansas. 

6,018 

57.8 

42.2 

17.1 

25.1 

20.5 

5.9 

District of Columbia 

1,029 

67.4 

32.6 

15.5 

17.1 

22.4 

1.6 

Illinois. 

22,656 

57.5 

42.5 

11.3 

31.2 

15.5 

7.7 

Kansas. 

6,100 

66.4 

33.6 

9.5 

24.1 

U.9 

4.5 

Louisiana..... 

13,648 

53.6 

46.4 

15.7 

30.7 

23.4 

6.0 

Massachusetts.. 

10,508 

65.0 

35.0 

9.1 

25.9 

12.2 

5.2 

Missouri...... 

13,833 

43.3 

56.7 

24.2 

32.5 

35.3 

9.0 

Montana. 

2,283 

67.7 

32.3 

11.0 

21.3 

12.9 

5.5 

Nebraska... 

4,922 

48.8 

51.2 

22.5 

28.7 

30.3 

7.8 

North Carolina. 

9,537 

34.1 

65.9 

28.7 

37.2 

45.3 

7.9 

Oklahoma. 

18,570 

39.7 

60.3 

18.9 

41.4 

37.3 

9.0 

South Dakota. 

1,840 

50.8 

49.2 

' 21.8 

27.4 

30.0 

7.8 

Utah. 

2,618 

72.4 

27.6 

7.5 

20.1 

9.1 

2.7 

West Virginia....... 

12,064 

48.4 

51.6 

20.6 

31.0 

31.0 

5.0 

Wisconsin.'.. 

10,368 

53.8 

46.2 

11.4 

34.8 

16.0 

9.2 


1/ The avn of these percentages and those for "any other person 18-64 years" la more 
than the percent of total families coutainlng other persons, since some families 
contained additional persons in different age groups. 

2/ See footnote 1, table 5. 





























































- - 


Ift'bl* faailies with brothers and sisters under a^e 18 not 

approred for aid, by person with whom approved children were 
living, for l6 States, October 19^2 


State 

AOC 

families 

Percent of specified type with 
brothers and sisters under 
age 18 not approved for aid ^ 

All 

families 

Both 

parents 

One 

parent 

Neither 

pso'ent 

Total. 

138,060 

17.4 

24.2 

16.8 

8.3 

Arl tone. 

2,066 

31.7 

32.7 

32.0 

25.3 

Arkansas. 

6,018 

16.8 

23.0 

16.2 

7,3 

01 strict of Columbia 

1.029 

20.5 

30.6 

19.3 

18.5 

Illinois. 

22,656 

8.6 

12.6 

8.5 

5.0 

Ksinaas... 

6,100 

7.6 

10.4 

7.6 

1.0 

Louisiana. 

13,648 

l4.l 

16.3 

14. p 

5.1 

Massachusetts. 

10,508 

9.3 

11.1 

9.^* 

5.4 

Missouri.. 

13.833 

26.3 

36.1 

25.4 

10.8 

Montana. 

2,283 

7.8 

12.4 

7.3 

2.4 

Hebraska.. 

4,922 

24.0 

28.0 

25.4 

11.4 

forth Carolina...... 

9.537 

36.8 

49.9 

37.1 

19.1 

Oklahoma. 

18,570 

21.4 

29.8 

21.3 

8.9 

South ikkota.. 

l,84o 

24.7 

31.6 

24.5 

11.7 

Utah.. 

2,6l8 

5.8 

8.7 

4.7 

2.5 

NsSt Virginia. 

12,064 

24.7 

32.3 

22.4 

10.3 

Wsconsln. 

10,368 

7.8 

9.7 

8.1 

4.1 


^ See footnote 1, table 

e 


Table 8.—i.DC families with specified persons in household lAo were not 
nenbers of the family, for l6 States, October 1942 


State 

ADC 

families 

Percent with specified 
other persons In household 

None 

Lodgers 

Oth«r 

pertoni 

Lodgers 
and other 
persons 

Total. 

138,060 

93.6 

3.0 

3.4 

(1) 


2,066 

99.2 

.4 

.4 


Arkansas. 

6^018 

96.7 

1.7 

1.6 


HI strict of Columbia 

1.029 

85.7 

i4.2 

.1 


Illinois. 

22,656 

90.3 

3.4 

6.3 

(1) 

r.-..- 

6,100 

95.0 

2.1 

2.9 


Louisiana. 

13^648 

92.1 

3.1 

4.7 

.1 

Massachusetts. 

10,508 

96.8 

1.6 

1.6 



13,833 

93.5 

5.7 




2,283 

94.0 

2.8 

3.2 



4.922 

93.4 

3.9 

2.7 


forth Carolina. 

9.537 

88.9 

4.0 

7.1 



18,570 

97.0 

1.1 

1.9 


South Dakota. 

1,840 

94.1 

3.9 

1.9 

.1 

Utah. 

2,6l8 

95.5 

.6 

3.8 

.1 


1? o64 

95.1 

1.0 

3.9 



10,368 

91.9 

5.5 

2.6 








Ij Less them 0.05 percent 





































































- 48 - 




VaM« 9 .—JLgp of porooas In ASC faallloa, 
for 16 Statoa, Oetotar 1942 


Stata 

Faraona 

In ADC 
faalliaa 

Fareant of apaelflad ac* 

TTndar 

18 

18-44 

45-64 

65 and 
oaar 

Total^. 

622.557 

61.7 

23.3 

12.3 

2.7 

Arlaona.. 

10.216 

65.8 

a. 9 

10.6 

1.7 

Arkanaaa.; 

27.332 

63,4 

a.i 

U.3 

4.2 

Olatrlot of Oolnatola 

4.842 

71.4 

22.6 

5.1 

.9 

Illlnola. 

93.306 

60.4 

25.2 

11.9 

2.5 

lanaaa. 

25.835 

63.2 

20.8 

13.9 

2.1 

Lonlalana.. 

64.728 

61.5 

23.9 

12.3 

2.3 

Naaaaehtiaatta. 

42.716 

62.1 

25.6 

10.2 

2.1 

Mlaaonrl. 

63.698 

61.8 

22.5 

12.6 

3.1 

Montana.. 

9.673. 

63.7 

19.6 

13.3 


Habraaka... 

a.610 

61.4 

20.9 

13.5 

4.2 

lorth Oarollna... 

46,449 

63.3 

23.0 

10.8 

2.4 

Oklahona.. 

88.506 

60.2 

24.5 

12.9 

2.4 

South Dakota.. 

7.936 

63.1 

a. 6 

12.Y 

3.0 

TTtnh. 

11.466 

63^2 

20.0 

l4.4 

2.4 

Vaat Yirclaia.. 

60.036 

63.4 

22.6 

12.2 

1.8 

Vlteonain. 

44.208 

58.8 

22.8 

l4.6 

3.8 


Tablo 10.—Sox and' relatlonahlp. to ehlldran approrod for aid of x>*raoBO 18 paara 
and oTar, ADC faalliaa, for 16 8tata», Ooto^r 1942 


Stata 

' Faraona 

18 ^aara 
and OTar 

Fareant of apaolflad 

Sax 

Halatlonahlp 

Mala 

Tam ala 

Faranta or 
ralatlraa 
in loco 
parantla 

Brothara 

and 

alatara 

Othar 

ralatlTaa 

Total. 

238,468 

28.3 

71.7 

69.2 

12.8 

18.0 

Arlaona.. 

3.499 

26.9. 

73.1 

72.9 

18.3 

8.8 

Arkanaaa. 

10,007 

28.9 

71.1 

74.9 

9.2 

15.9 

Dlatrlet of Columbia 

1.386 

16.0 

84.0 

82.0 

11.3 

6.7 

Illlnola. 

36.990 

22.9 

77.1 

67.2 

14.5 

18.5 

Kanaaa. 

J*5ao 

25.7 

74.3 

76.9 

11.2 

11.9 

Loulalana.. 

24,948 

31.7 

68.3 

71.8 

11.8 

16.4 

Masaaohuaatta. 

16,200 

22.0 

78.0 

73-1 

i 4.9 

12.0 

Missouri. 

24,346 

28.9 

71.1 

68.8 

10.7 

20.5 

Montana.. 

3.517 

27.5 

72.5 

78.4 

8.7 

12.9 

Nebraaka.. 

8,344 

30.2 

69.8 

70.2 

12.3 

17.5 

Forth Carolina...... 

17.067 

27.5 

72.5 

64.6 

16.6 

18.8 

Oklahoma.. 

35.268 

31.7 

68.3 

62.5 

10.3 

27.2 

South Dakota.. 

2.933 

24.4 

75.6 

71.5 

13.(5 

15.5 

Utah. 

4,215 

31.5 

68.5 

82.0 

10.8 

7.2 

Vast Tlri^nla. 

22,000 

33-5 

66.5 

72.9 

13.5 

13.6 

Wisconsin. 

18,228 

28.2 

71.8 

65.4 

15.7 

18.9 


























































TaM« 11.—i^e of children nnder a^e 18, ADC faalllee, 
for l6 States, October 1942 


State 

Children 
under 
age 18 

Percent of specified age 

Under 

6 

6-11 

12-17 

Total 

12-13 

i4-15 

16-17 

Total.. 

38*^.089, 

20.3 

36.8 

42.9 

15.5 

16.1 

11.3 

Arisona.. 

1 

6.717 

18.6 

37.7 

43.7 

17.0 

16.4 

10.3 

Arkansas. 

17.325 

21.0 

38.1 

40.9 

15.4 

i4.9 

10.6 

District of Columbia 

3.456 

26.5 

39.8 

33.7 

i4.9 

12.6 

6.2 

Illinois. 

56.316 

19.5 

35.8 

44.7 

15.5 

16.1 

13.1 

KansM. 

16.315 

18.4 

36.6 

45.0 

15.8 

16.5 

12.7 

Louisiana.. 

^.78p 

22.1 

36.5 

4l.4 

15.2 

15.1 

11.1 

Massachusetts. 

216,516 

16.2 

37.8 

46.0 

15.8 

17.7 

12.5 

Missouri. 

39.352 

20.6 

3*. 5 

40.9 

15.8 

16.0 

9.1 

Montana.. 

6,156 

a. 8 

36.2 

42.0 


15.2 

11.6 

Hebraska.. 

13,266 

17.4 

37.7 

44.9 

16.6 

17.9 

10.4 

Horth Carolina.. 

29.382 

19.0 

37.9 

43.1 

15.5 

15.9 

11.7 

Oklahoma.. 

53.23* 

23.8 

36.7 

39.5 

15.0 

15.2 

9.3 

South Dakota.. 

5.003 

16.1 

38.2 

45.7 

17.2 

18.1 

10.4 

Utah. 

7.251 

20.4 

36.2 

43.4 

i4.q 

15.5 

13.0 

West Tlrglnla.. 

38.036 

23.0 

36.1 

4o.9 

i4.4 

15.5 

11.0 

Wisconsin.. 

25.980 

15.4 

33.6 

51.0 

17.1 

18.9 

15.0 


Table 12.—ADC families, bj number of children untler 18 :rears, 
for l6 States, October 1942 


State 

ADC 

families 

Percent with specified number of children 

1 

2 

3 

4 

.5 

6 

7 or 

more 

Total. 

138.060 

24.6 

27.6 

20.1 

12.8 

7.6 

3.9 

3.4 

ArlEona. 

2.066 

l4.l 

23.6 

24.3 

15.8 

11.2 

6.7 

4.3 

Arkansas. 

6,018 

22.3 

25.8 

21.5 

14.5 

8.5 

4.6 

2.8 

District of Columbia 

1.029 

12.0 

22.6 

26.2 

17.9 

9.2 

6.3 

5.8 

Illinois. 

22,656 

31.7 

28.4 

19.1 

10.5 

5.7 

. 2.5 

2.1 

Kansas. 

6,100 

26.3 

29.4 

18.7 

11.8 

7.8 

3.4 

2.6 

Louisiana.. 

13,648 

24.4 

25.2 

19.6 

12.7 

8.8 

5.2 

4.1 

Massachusetts. 

10,508 

25.4 

32.5 

22.6 

10.8 

4.9 

1.8 

^0 

Missouri. 

13 .*33 

22.5 

27.8 

20.5 

13.8 

8.2 

3.* 

3.4 

Montana.. 

2,283 

27.3 

27.1 

19.9 

12.0 

6.9 

?-4 

3.4 

Kebraeka. ....1 . 

4,922 

26.3 

29.1 

18.8 

12.3 

6.5 

4.0 

3.0 

forth Carollnsu-..... 

9.537 

16.5 

27.3 

a.i 

15.9 

10.3 

5.6 


Oklahoma.. 

18.570 

22.2 

27.9 

19.8 

l4.o 

8.0 

4.1 

4.0 

South Dakota.. 

l,84o 

22.7 

31.0 

20.6 

12.5 

7.2 

4.0 

2.0 

Utah. 

2,6l8 

26.4 

25.7 

19.7 

13.2 

7.5 

4.2 


West Tlrglala.. 

12,064 

19.5 

24.4 

19.6 

15.3 

10.1 

5.1 

6.0 

Wlsoonein . 

10,368 

31.4 

28.4 

18.8 

10.1 

4.9 

2.9 

3.0 


y 0.5 percent of ADC faalllee had no children under a^ 18; some counties la 
Vlsconsln give aid to children up to 21 years. 































































-.50 - 


fabla 13.—iDC fMlliM, by ntuiber of ^lldron imdor mg* 18 . 
•dJtLotod for difforoneoa eaon^ Stato 1>oimlatlons 
In tho mibor of diildron par faally. 
for 16 Statoa, Ootobar 19U2 


Stata 

Pareant of faMlllaa with 

apaclflad naabar of ehlldran 

1 

1 child 

2 ehlldran 

3 or Bora 
ehlldran 

Arlaona.. 

17.1 

25.9 

57.0 

Arkanaaia. 

25.6 

28.7 

45.7 

Olatrlct of Colnabla 

8.0 

18.4 

73.6 

Illlnola. 

25.8 

24.5 

49.7 

Kanaaa. 

25.3 

28.8 

45.9 

Loiiiolana.. 

26.0 

28.5 

45.5 

Naaaadbnaatta. 

24.5 

30.4 

45.1 

Nlaaoori. 

20*. 3 

27.4 

52.3 

Montana.. 

28.8 

24.8 

46.4 

Habraaka. 

26.4 

27.4 

46.2 

Hortb Carolina.. 

a. 7 

32.3 

46.0 

Oklabona.. 

23.6 

29.5 

46.9 

Sooth Dakota.. 

24.6 

33.1 

42.3 

Utah. 

33.2 

24.0 

4^8 

Vaat Virginia.. 

25.0 

28.1 

4^.9 

Vleeonaln. 

30.8 

27.6 

4 i :6 


Sabla l 4 .—ADO faadliaa, bp moibar of ohlldr'a approrad far aid, 
for 16 Statoa, Ootobar 1942 


" stata 

▲DC 

fanilloa 

Pareant with apaolflad 

Boabar of ahlldran approrad y 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 br 

aoro 

total. 

138,060 

33.9 

28.2 

17.8 

10.5 

5 .^ 

2.6 

1.6 

Arlaona. 

2.066 

24.0 

27.9 

21.0 

13.6 

8.6 

3.6 

1.3 

Arkanaaa. 

6,018 

27.3 

27.8 

20.3 

13.5 

6.4 

3.4 

1.3 

Uotrlot of Ooltiabla 

1,029 

16.3 

^.5 

25.5 

17.0 

8.4 

4.8 

3.5 

Illlnola. 

22,656 

38.7 

27.8 

16.5 

9 .‘» 

4.2 

1.9 

1.5 

Kanaaa. 

6,100 

30.9 

29.0 

17.9 

10.9 

6.4 

2.9 

2.0 

Looialana. 

13,648 

30.8 

27.4 

18.0 

11.5 

6.5 

3.7 

2.1 

Naaaaohnaatta. 

10,508 

29.5 

32.8 

21.0 

9.5 

4.5 

1.1 

1.6 

Klaaoorl. 

13.833 

34.8 

28.6 

16.7 

11.0 

5.4 

2.5 

1.0 

Montana. 

2,283 

32.1 

26.9 

18.7 

11.0 

6.1 

2.9 

2.3 

lobraaka. 

4.922 

38.2 

27.5 

16.2 

9.1 


2.8 

1.1 

lorth Oarollna. 

9.537 

32.0 

31.4 

19.0 

10.7 

4.8 

1.5 

.6 

Oklahoaa. 

18,570 

39.5 

26.8 

15.6 

9.5 


2.5 

1.2 

Sooth Ikkota. 

1 , 84 o 

33.5 

30.1 

17.6 

9.9 

5.5 

* 2.5 

.9 

Utah. 

2,618 

29.6 

26.4 

18.2 

12.6 

6.8 

3.6 

2.8 

Vi at Virginia. 

12,064 

27.6 

26.4 

19.7 

12.6 

7.1 

Co 

2.6 

Vlaoonaln. 

10,368 

38.4 

27.9 

16.4 

8.5 

4.5 

2.1 

2.2 


^ Soo footnota 1 , tabla 5 ' 





















































- 51 - 


Table 19 .—Childrea aader 16 jreara not approTod for add, gronp amd raiea, 

IDC fnalliaa, for 16 Staitas, October 1342 


Percent of children in epecified a^ gronp net approred for add 


State 

All races 

White 1/ 

lonidilte 

Tinder 

16 

Tinder 

6 

6-11 

12-15 

Tinder 

16 

Tinder 

6 

6-11 

12-15 

Tinder 

16 

Under 

6 

6-11 

12-15 

Total. 

8.8 

17.4 

6.1 

6.3 

7.7 

16.3 

5.3 

5.5 

12.3 

20.3 

8.7 

9.8 

Arisona... 

7.9 

20.3 

4.7 

4.6 

7.6 

19.7 

4.6 

‘^.3 

14.5 

31.0 

6.1 

12.3 

Arkansas. 

5.3 

12.7 

3.1 

3.0 

4.7 

11.1 

2.9 

2.9 

6.8 

16.7 

3.6 

3.2 

District of Columbia 

2.7 

6.8 

.9 

1.5 

2.0 

8.5 

sees 

• sees 

2.8 

6.5 

1.0 

1.8 

Illinois..-. 

6.1 

1.2.2 

4.3 

4.3 

5.‘^ 

13. 

3.5 

3.8 

7.2 

10.9 

5.7 

5.6 

lansaa. 

5-Z 

7.1 

2.7 

2.9 

3.0 

5.6 

2.3 

2.5 

7.0 

12.3 

4.8 

5.6 

Louisiana....'. 


19.4 

6.i 

5.9 

7.8 

18.1 

5.3 

4.2 

11.4 

20.8 

7.5 

8.5 

lUssadiusetts. 

2.3 

7.1 

1.4 

.9 

2.4 

7.6 

1.4 

.9 

.3 


.7 


Missouri. 

9.2 

18.2 

5.3 

8.2 

8.4 

15.6 

5.0 

8.2 

12.7 

^.1 

6.9 

8.1 

Montana.. 

5.1 




4.2 

9.2 


3.2 

8.8 

10.5 

6.3 

10.3 

■ebraska.. 

5.7 

14.1 

3.H 

4.0 

5.2 

11.9 

3.^ 

3.9 

11.5 


3.8 

5*? 

forth Carolina.. 

19.7 

35.9 

lb. 2 

14.1 

17.3 

33.8 

13.4 

12.5 

25.9 

W.6 

23.4 

18.6 

Oklahoma.. 

13.2 

21.2 

9.5 

11.3 

11.3 

18.9 

8.6 

9.2 

18.2 

26.0 

12.1 

17.9 

South Dakota.. 

4.0 

9.6 

2.6 

3.0 

3.6 

9.3 

2.3 

2.8 

7.7 

10.6 

5.5 

6.7 

Utah. 

3.‘‘ 

5.7 

2.2 

3.2 

3.‘» 

5.7 

2.2 


e e t e e 

a e e e e 

sees 

e e • e a 

West Tirginia.. 

10.3 

20.3 

6.^ 

7.1 

10.1 

20.2 

6.4 

6.8 

13. 

21.5 

9.2 

11.6 

Wiseonsin.. 

6.7 

16.0 

5.*^ 

3.« 

6.6 

15.7 

5.5 

3.8 

11.2 

(2) 

.... 

8.6 


Xj Inelndea. in 10 Stntea, eone children of nonidilto rncea other than Hegro. The faniliee represented by anch 
children constitute 0 .3 percent of adl ADO feailiea; less than 1 percent of the ADC families in 8 States 
(Arisona, lansas, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Missouri, Montana, Horth Carolina, and Utah) and iqpproxinataly 
2 percent in the other 2 States (Vebraiska and Wisconsin). 

2 / lot oonputed; bates too small. 


Table 16 .—ADC families, by relatire with whom children were liring, for 16 States, October 1942 


Percent in ^ich children are living with— 


State 

ADC 

families 

Both parents 

Mother 

only 

lather 

only 

Step¬ 

parent 

other 

relative 

Total 

latnral 

or 

adoptive 

Mother 

and 

step¬ 

father 

lather 

and 

step¬ 

mother 

Total. 

138,060 

19.6 

18.3 

1.2 

0.1 

69.2 

1.6 

0.1 

9.5 


2,066 

23.5 

23.0 

.4 

.1 

68.6 

1.3 


6.6 

Arkaneae. 

6ioi8 

24.5 

23.1 

1.2 

.2 

62.6 

2.0 

(1) 

10.9 

District of Columbia 

1.029 

10.5 

10.2 

.3 


82.4 

.3 

.1 

6.7 

Illinois. 

22,656 

9.7 

8.3 

1.3 

.1 

81.1 

.8 

.1 

6,3 


6,100 

20.1 

19.8 

.3 

■ (1) 

70.4 

1.5 


8.0 


13.648 

31.3 

29.1 

2.0 

.2 

56.8 

2.1 


9.8 


10,508 

13.833 

12.7 

21.1 

ii.5 

20.3 

1.2 


80.2 

.7 

.2 

6.2 


.7 

.1 

68.1 

1.5 


9.3 

Montana.. 

2,283 

20.8 

20.0 

.6 

.2 

66.5 

1.8 

.1 

10.8 

lebraska.. 

4,922 

19.0 

18.2 

.7 

.1 

66.2 

1.6 

.2 

13*^ 

Worth Carolina.. 

9.537 

15.6 

15.1 

.4 

.1 

70.1 

1.5 

• 3 

12.5 


18.'i70 

18.6 

15.8 

2.5 

.3 

66.5 

3.2 


11.7 

South Dakota.. 

1,840 

13.9 

13.5 

.3 

.1 

''VI 

.8 


6.0 

Utah.. 

2.618 

32.1 

31.3 

.8 

(1) 

58.6 

Xa 6 

.1 

7.4 

West Virginia.. 

12,064 

33.0 

32.1 

.6 

.3 

57.1 

2.2 

(1) 

7.7 

Wisconsin. 

10,368 

15.0 

i 4.9 

.1 

(1) 

72.3 

.8 

.1 

XXe S 


if Less than 0.0^ percent. 















































































- 52 - 


T&ble 17 .—Parent to whom payaent was made fdien 
both parents were in the hone, ISC fanilles, 
for 16 States. October 1942 


State 


Fanilles 
with both 
parents 
in home 1 / 


Percent in «Aich 
paynent was nade to— 


Mother 


Father 


Other 

relatlre 


Total 


Ixisona. 

ixkansas. 

District of Ooltmbla 
Illlnol. 


25.281 


60.3 


39.6 .1 


475 

1.393 

105 

1.896 


77.6 

24.2 

92.4 

65.5 


21.8 

75.8 

7.6 

34.5 



Kansas. 

Louid sma.... 
Massachusetts 
Missouri. 


1.205 

3,972 

1,212 

2,813 


43.8 
26.0 
98.7 

74.9 


56.2 

73.9 

1.3 

25.1 


... 1 
.1 


Montana. 

Hebraska.. 

Horth Carolina, 
Oklahoma.. 


456 

898 

1.437 

2,94 o 


79.4 

84.0 

80.8 

71.0 


20.6 

14.9 

19.2 

28.8 


1.1 


.2 


South Dakota.. 

Utah.. 

West Tirginla, 
Wi soon sin..... 


24s 

8 I 9 

3.872 

1.540 


.95.2 

33.2 

49.7 

99.2 


4.8 

66.7 

50.3 

.8 



\] Both natural or adoptire; does not include families in 
idiich one parent is a stepparent. 


Table 18.-~A.SC families with widowed mother per 100 families 
in population with children and widowed female head, 
for 16 States, October 1942 


State 

Families in 
population 
with ohlldren 
and female 
Widowed head 

y 

ADC families 
with widowed mother 

■umber 

Bsr 100 families 
with children 
and female 
widowed bead 

Total. 

277,969 

46,589 

16.8 

Arisona. 

2,720 

824 

30 . 3 ' 

Arkansas. 

18,643 

2,015 

10.8 

District of Columbia 

4,972 

292 

5.9 

Illinois. 

51.519 

7,992 

15.5 

Kansas. 

12,124 

1.920 

15.8 

Louisiana. 

25,016 

3.924 

15.7 

Nassacfau setts. 

32.516 

4.656 

14.3 

Missouri... 

26,191 

4.354 

16.6 

Montsina. 

3.099 

683 

22.0 

Nebraska. 

7.906 

1,288 

16.3 

North Carolina. 

31.578 

4,680 

14.8 

Oklahcma. 

22,710 

4,452 

19.6 

South Dakota. 

3,029 

818 

27.0 

Utah... 

3.135 

771 

24.6 

West Virginia. 

14.673 

3,604 

24.6 

Wisconsin. 

18,138 

4.316 

23.8 


^ Istloiated by applying 1940 census data on percent of femsde 
widowed beads with children in urban, rural-nonfam, and 
rural-farm population in North last. North Central, South, 
and West regions to corresponding State figures on the 
npmber of female widowed heads. 

































































- 53 - 


Cable 19 .—UW faalllea: Baaeont for lack of eupport or caro b/ the father and bp the aothor, 

16 States, October 1942 


Beaeon for lack 
of the father's 
support or care 

Bircent of 

faallles 

with 

epecifled 
reasea for 
lack of 
the father's 
support 
or care 



Bircent of faallles with specified reason for lack 
. the aether's support or care 

of 



let In hoae 

In home 

Cetal 

Bead 

>s- 

traaced 

1 / 

Inca¬ 

paci¬ 

tated 

Other 

reason 

Cotal 

leeded 

la 

hesie 

Unea- 

ploped 

?/ 

• 

laca- 

pacl- 

tated 

Other 

reason 

Setal. 

100.0 

11.2 

6.8 

2.3 

0.7 

1.4 

88.8 

60.1 

22.7 

5.9 

0.1 




■either parent 

la hoae 


Nether onlp in 

noae 


■et la hoae. 

7«.« 

9.5 

5.6 

1.9 

0.6 

1.4 

69.3 

>♦3.7 

20.6 

>♦.9 

0.1 

Bead. 

37.2 

3.5 

2.6 

.4 

.2 

.3 

33.7 

21.4 

9.9 

2.4 

(4) 

lotranced 

35 .« 


2.3 

1.4 

.3 

.9 

30.9 

18.8 

9.7 

2.3 

.1 

lacapacltated 

2.7 

.4 

.2 

(4) 

.1 

.1 

2.3 

1.7 

,5 

.1 


Other reasea. 

3.1 

.7 

.5 

.1 

(3) 

.1 

2.4 

1.8 

.5 

.1 

(4) 



Ihtber ealp la hoae 

Beth parents la hoae 

In hoae.. 

21.2 

1.7 

1.2 

0.4 

0.1 

(k) 

19 ^ 

16.4 

2.1 

1.0 

(4) 

laoivaoltated 

ISA 

1.1 

.8 

.3 

(4) 

(4) 

18.3 

15.4 

2.0 

.9 


Oaeaploped 2/ 

1.0 

.4 

.3 

.1 

(4) 

(4) 

.6 

.5 

(4) 

.1 

(4) 

Other reason. 

.8 

.2 

.1 

(4) 

.1 


.6 

.5 

.1 

(4) 



^ laolndes dlroroe, desertion, and aeparatloa. 

^ Or with Insofflelent eamlncs. 

V Inolndes dlroroe, desertion, separation, and the father not aarrled to the aether, 
^ Less than 0.0$ percent. 


Cable 20.-~Chlldren ^prored for ASC; Beasons for lack of support or care bp the father and bp the aother, 

16 States, October 19^ 


Bsroent of 
children 


Bsroent of children with specified reason for lack of 
the Mother's support or care 


Beason for lack 
of the father's 
etqppert or care 

wna 

tp«olfl«d 
reasea for 
IsbCk of 
the father's 
support 
or care 

lot In hoae 

In hoae 

Cotal 

Bead 

Xs- 

tran^ed 

1/ 

Inca¬ 

paci¬ 

tated 

Other 

reason 

Total 

Heeded 

In 

hoae 

Oaea- 

ploped 

2/ 

lacsi- 

paci- 

tated 

Other 

reason 

Total. 

100.0 

8.3 

5.2 

1.6 

0.6 

0.9 

91.7 

6«I.O 

19.0 

4.6 

0.1 




■either parent 

in hoae 


Mother onlp In hoae 

lot la hoae. 

73.3 

6.6 

4.0 

1.3 

0.4 

0.9 

66.7 

46.2 

17.1 

3.3 

0.1 

Bead. 

36.1 

2.5 

1.9 

.3 

.1 

.2 

33.6 

23.4 

8.6 

1.6 

(4) 

lstraa<ed 

31.2 

3.2 

1.5 


.2 

.6 

2g.O 

18.8 

7.6 

1.5 

.1 

laoapacltated 

2.7 

.3 

.2 

(4) 

.1 

(4) 

2.4 

1.9 

.4 

.1 


Other reason. 

3.3 

.6 

.4 

.1 

(4) 

.1 

2.7 

2.1 

.5 

.1 

(4) 



Ihther onlp In hoae 

Both parents la hoae 

la hoae. 

26.7 

1.7 

1.2 

0.3 

0.2 

(4) 

25.0 

21.8 

1.9 

1.3 

(4) 

lacapacltated 

24.9 

1.1 

.8 

.2 

.1 

(4) 

23.8 

20.8 

1.8 

1.2 


Uaeaploped 2/ 

1.1 

.4 

.3 

.1 

(4) 

(4) 

.7 

.6 

(4) 

.1 

(4) 

Other reason. 

.7 

.2 

.1 

(4) 

.1 

(>♦) 

.5 

.4 

.1 

(4) 



ij Includes dlroroe, desertion, and separation. 

2/ Or with Insufficient eamlncs. 

V Includes dlrorce, desertion, separation, and the father not aarrled to the aother. 
^ Less than 0.0$ percent. 









































































































Tablt 21.—JLDC fudlitt with sp#oifl«d r«Moa for look of oopport or e«ro kj ono and bj both paroato* for l6 Statos» Oetobor 19^ 




u 

o 

I 


Vt 

o 

I 

xi 

49 

t 


9 


d 

8 

>4 

iS 


>« ^ 

a d 


3 || 


& 


A 

I 


s| 

*1 


A « 



* •• 
n 


d 

e 

■ 

4 

O 


M 

e 


5 


cul 

^ K 

ti 

^ %4 

4* ^ 

mi 

t 


4» S 

s 


i 


n 


O 

04 


-I 

«5 

A 


S 


w 

i 


I 


*il 


O S 

sl 


49 

I 


d 

49 5 

n 


o 




VO 

• 

K\ 

M 


M 

S 


KN 

kC\ 


irv 

(\i 


VO 

r*^ 

KN 


tr\ 

• 

VO 

CM 


VO 

CM 


d 

o 


49 

s 

i 


4* 

d 

4» 

00 


00 

00 


ir\ KNVO <H irv 9N fH 


CM 


K\ 


«H CM 


O w 


• ITN 


^CM^ 

trv • 


m if\ 


^ VO 00 CM 


00 ICVd" K\ 


CM VO OJt 


00 00 oxd* 


VO 00 00 K\ vOKVOOr^ OVOOVOOV CMOOr^rM 
CM»^K>(M CMi-4 cm CMCMKVCM KV 


VO o irvvo 

* • • • 


00 «-t H 


OVOO CM h- 

Jd rHVO Jd VOI^CM*iC^ Cm'h^W^ 

Tfv jt K>^ if\vo 00 m irv uSif ifv 


irvi# ifv irvh- 


ITNCM CM 

• • • 

o 


ss 


JdOvCMH^ »<>OCM00 


a> ON 00 
f 1 <H CM* 


r^jt H 00 


ovcM crvo 

• • • • 


CM »H 

• • • • 


ovvo irv 

• • • 


00 K\K\ 


vocMvor^ h-ocr^ ^ oo oo lo f-iooirvav 

CMKVd'jd KVhSi^KV k>cmcmcm 


evCMjd* ov 

« • • • 

CM 


^ 00 ir\ 

• • • • 

CM ^ CM 


oo irvvo o 

• • • • 

KMTVp-I kv 


irvCM r^Jt 

• » • • 

IH CM CM KV 


JO ovf^ ir\ 

• * • • 


— KVOO 


CM VO VO 


O 1-4 <-IVO 


QCMKVf^ OVONH-vr^ ^ H ^ »-4 

HS KV \C\Jt Jt KV ^ KVKVCMjd T^KVCMKV 


ir\ o 

CM CM CM 


00 0\Jt KV 


OM 


O OJtVO ov 

•H iH KV 


K\jt CM CM 
• • • • 

K\|H 00 ir\ 

KVKVCM I-I 


Mvo 00 r^ 
• • • • 

00 CTVOQ 
CM «H N 


O oo rH C7V 

• • • • 

00 r^vo o 

CM CM CM CM 


OVVD IfVO 

* • • • 

ON Q 00 

I-I^ K\CM 


KVONCTVJt 

• « • • 

CM CM IH f-l 


cnoJt r«- 

• • • • 

iH KV CM CM 


KVjt ovo 

• • • • 

CM CM ITVCM 


ON o iTv 

• • • • 

p-t fH CM K\ 


VO ITVCM VO 

• • • • 

KVOVCM <rv 

Jt KVKVKV 


w ^ % 

irvjt h- 
K>f»\)t 


CM ^ 

• • 

h-vD 
KV 


r^iHvor^ jtooh^iH 


ITVCM ITSfH 

KV KVITV KV 


Kvjt VO 

Jt KvKVjt 


49 

d 

tl 


• d 

• «H 

• o 

• 

• o 

• o 

• 

• Vi 

• O 

• 

m 49 m 
d O «H 

• ^ o 
u d 




49 

4» 


ij t 

• <H o d 

d <• d o 
d •H • • 

3ljs 


d 

d 


il§ I 


d 

4> 

o 


d jq 4 
4» d 

• o ^ 

X OB OB o 


d 

li 


_ d 

Id ^ 


§ 


^ d 

o 

49 O 

• • 

O • w 

M D > X 


?-s 


s 

d 

o 

• 

d 

s 

8 

O 

>« 

o 


>4 

o 

I 


u 

A 


l4 

A 

a 

49 

o 


I 

Vi 


U 

JB 

49 

o 

a 


o 

49 


I S 


4» 

O 

d 

u 

s 

4» 


u o 

o 

a d 

• 

iH • 

d o 

4> 

o • 

gi 

o • 

•ss 

• £ 

• o 

y a 

4» 

d u 

• o 

O Vi 
Vi 

8,a 

jq 

• 

e % 


d 

s 


aa 

i 


d 

fO 

it 

4> 

o 

o 

Vi 

o 

5 


>4 

e 


S M 

#d 

4> 

M 

A 

R 

•H _ 

A a CVd 

W 

Pi 

aa a 

a d 
• u a 

§■ 

81! . 
#H 4* d 

^a 

A 

O 

d *d •H 

J 5 d 


a o A 

d 


§ 

s 


ji 

49 

u 

o 

Vt 

a> 




d 

%* 

t, 

A 

49 

o 

A 

Vi 

O 

• 

o 

O 


8 

A 

g* 

A 

O 

I 


• 4* 

d • d 

• • 

• MO 
d d d 
O f 

d A 

'C 9 ITV • d 

8 d O ^ 
« d 

• 4> O d 4» 

*6 d o d 

• d Vi a 

* •r4 d a o 
a o o A 84 
o «-! 4> a 
84 Vi. ITV A 
O Vi a o 

► da 4^4 

rl • • o • 

^ d r-l O 


>9 ^ ■8 £ 8 

d Ti d d 
iH a iH a i-i 
O o a o 
d V* d a d 

l-l O IH M HI 




\ 

























































Table 22.—.Reason for lack of support or care b/ the father, ADC faalllest for l6 States, October 1942 


55 


d 

o 

• 

d 

s 

•d 

e 

.H 

Vi 

o 

1 

u 

o 

Vi 

U 

s 

4» 

' e 

5. 

e 

\i 

O 

$* 

o 

4> 

84 

O 

1 

1] 

O 

e 

iH 

a 

e 

.H 

1 

4> 

d 

e 

o 

u 

£ 

^ d 1 
e 'H o 

iS 

K> 

• 

0 

eg 41^^ eg • k\ ^ ^ 4f\ • eg • 

• •• •••* ••«• 

: : : 

*H i • 

4» ^ O r-l 

£42*5 

5 s • , 

l£\ 

• 

0 

• • • c • • 

• ^ KNNo ttxri • 4 •cgje • 

• • • • ^ * 

• • • • • « 

• • • • • • 

* *2 %1 ^ j. • 

g ^844ag* E w 
Seo4>6^ad 

0 

• 

0H 

e 

cgsoerxso eg irv^e irt * cr\ 0 r-i 

HrHCg •iHpi 

• 

e 

4* 84 d 

d e 2 

s 

5 ® 2 

• 

0 

■H soj 4 ir\ osor-iH ir\o\r^o 

eg H fH 

i ^ • 
r 2 o 

«i5a 

jt 

• 

0 

K%F-^«oeg fHegiTviTN f-^o^cg • t-ur 0 • 

• •• •••• •••• 

eg ♦ »H • 

• • 

• • 

1 • ^ 

■ ^ s 

M 84 2 
dl ® 

0 

• 

eg 

js o>eg ITS irNh»cg 0 lojr sova 
#•«• •••• •••• •••• 
f 4 ^ fH eg KNi^ eg«H^cg eg ih eg eg 

*d 

e 

4» 

« 

4» 

.H 

1 

d 

sS 

S!-S 

• 

eg 

eg tfMO K> 0 K\ je so so ITk K>h-cg r1 

• ••• •••• •••• 

ir\i-ije eg eg egje eg eg trNK\f-i K>rHcg^ 

^ i 

Jt 

0 

o^• 

fH 

K\K\VO ri ^OOKNCg K\034VC r*» Cg 

• ••• •••• •••• •••• 

pir\^as OiHegcg r-t 9>vi> vx> jd eg kmtv 

^eg FiKNHeg egiHp^iH «-ik\k\i-i 

4> 

e 

ei 

f-l 

SI 

ir\wjtJt VC H dNiTN to eg f 4 oervHSo 

• •••• 
ITiVC je iH iH K\vc ^ Kvjt 0 SO SO KNVD OV 

egegr-iF-4 cgKNF^cg egegegf-t 

K 

.H 

9 

Vi 

g 

8« 

Vi 

<i 

e 

1 

84 

4> 

• 

SS 

• S! ^ 

tT:o£-si» 

* 9 o •• r - 

H H .9 

r— 

• 

cr> 

r-4VCKNO ONVO O H 

• «•• •••• «••• •••• 

VO r—VO u\ jdh-ifNKN meg 0 f— 

fH fH fH i-I ^ 

0 • e ^ ^ 

^ 4> 4» d 4> e 

4 * . d 4 0 M J 

8« b • u <d d 

a 0 4 4» e 2 

a 

0 

• 

iTi 

Kvov-deg vor^sum H%K>egr- fhvo 0 m 

• ••• •••• •••• 

egmsQKv irvjt 0 m ^voojd eyssoKvso 

FHM^Cg F^F4F^r^ fHfHfHfS F-f 

• 0 a as* a 

9Sg 

P4 3 (H 

»-l 

• 

rH 

or^egvo kmooo ^^voeg vojeKNe— 

• ••• •••• •«•• •••• 

so o^eg 9 v vo^ Itvkn vovoegso vpf.>egjt|- 

F^F^ ^ M 

•3 

4* 

£ 

SO 

• 

ir\ 

K\ 

^ eg er ^40 vo f 4 F-e ov ^ eg meg vovomm 

• ••• •••• ••«• •••• 

VO mvo r*- r—oor— mosovo iHsomo 

eg KvHSmm k\^ meg eg m 


'9 

«S 

eg 

• 

K\ 

avdvojd f4 ^^vovo OF-ioveg 


e 

4* 

4 

4* 

CO 

Total. 

Arisona. 

Arkansas. 

District of Coluabla 
Illinois. 

Kansas. 

Louisiana. 

Maseachusetts. 

Missouri. 

Montana. 

Nebraska. 

North Carolina. 

OklahcBM. 

South Dakota. 

Utah.: 

Vest Tirginia. 

Visoonsin. 


S 


4» 

O 

ii 

ii 


e 


tt t 


u 

o 


u 

o 

I 


m M 
- e 

5t: 

4» O 

^ 9< 

is 

-S& 

•H 

Vi 

fl 

JB 

•*» 4* 

8 ^ 

|4 ^ 

8 .^ 

ir\ d • 

o ^ 

• Q 

8 

J e u 

2 8. 

** &in 

• o 


e • o 

--I- 

d d d 

o o • o 
d d e d 

M 1^ M »H 


I 


e. 


/ 


0*9 percent in which the father 





























































Table 23.—ADC faalliee deprlred of support or .care bj the father for epeclfled reason 
per 100 ADC fanllles with father dead, for 16 States* Octgber 1942 


aj-si 

0 * 

iH 

• • • • 

*^4 • 4 4 

M SI e 

4 * H 0 H 

H 

• 444 44 

4 , 4 4 4 4 

4 H 4-1 <>J >N.HCM 4 • ,^10 ^4 

4 KV •4•^4^ 4»0*4 

• 4 4 4 4 4 

*^■3. 


4 

rraojKvai je tf>iH e> 

0 9^ 

4 

4 

4 

4» >4 g 

SSi 3 

e ^ S 

^ o • 

CM 

IOCgtf>i-4 K\CMM^ ITMTVH K> i^vO M M 

K\ 


iH 

4 4 

VO K\^ , ^ H K\ ? 

K\ KV 4 K\ 4 

4 4 

4 4 

ii I 

M I 4 ^ 

fk 0 

IfN 

v-vo w voje ov4> 

S 

M p,4» 

ON 

(TN 

FlS'JSv.S' ^13-^ 

1 

k4 

m 

z 

•o 

S) 

9 

>4 

• 

M 

^ l4 * 

S i s 

'« 

■3 8RS ^iK?SJ? 2“* 8.“? 

3* • 4» - 

^ 4» ^ 0 4» • 

ssfSiM 
1 2.1*“* 

5 

5'!R5R S'JTSS 

*1 

If sals 


ri CVJ cO Jt M KVK> Jt ^ VO KMf\ K^ 

4* 

£ 

VO 

ON 

wmKvw 0 cvj K\«> vovo Kvr^ h^ovr-vo 
vD w irv cvj H o^vo 0 0 ^ Kvvo vD w r«-v2> 

e 

4> 

e 

4» 

<0 

* ••0, •••• ,4,, •••• 

e e s e eeee eeee eeee 

• **•£* «••• •••• 

• **B* 

• ••p* *••• •••• 

• ♦•M* •••• ••j* •••• 

• *•«$• ♦••• ••e, 

• ••O, •••« ••0, 

• •••H, e,«0, 

• ••> 4 , ••4*, 44«fl, 

Q ••o« ••e, •• 0 , 04t4, 

S : S 5^* : w Jj J :SI 

£ -••1*3 «4Jo3 <S * Urn 

S4 da«Ho v^od Pe 0 ,^0 

odM 0 eaeg 35jg^ M 1 0 

tIiS i^s- g'3-s 

£S£5i ££&^ 




In hone or elseehere. 

Heeded in hone and support not 
l«eos then 0.9 percent. 















































57 




U 

• 

5 

S 

• 

5 


a 

O 

>4 

o 




u 

o 

V4 


o 

s 

& 

I 

I 




auoeee^ 

jei^o 

rrr 

« 

o 

•••• •••• ... P- • ^ 4 « 

•••• •••• *•.. •... 

•••• ... • ,, 
'•••• •••• •• *•^ 1 ,. , 

• ••• •••• «• •jsi «• . 

*••• . .. 
**•* ••.. ... • «• 

0 

O 

m 

0 

s 

U 

e 

S' 

u 

<8 

9 

a 

o 

u 

o 

4* 

■ 

u 

9 

ja 

4» 

O 

fl 

• 

5 

0 

U 

3 

m 

9 

1 

O 

V4 

o 

♦» 

0 

e 

o 

u 

6 

e 

Pi • 

p- 

ol 

Oi 

VO 0 >H irv ^ to KNH o VO VO ON tOj^ONKN 

^ 2 • 

^ 0 

: 0 ^ 

M 

5 

tfNONlTVVO P->r^(\lVO KNf^Oiri ^ KNCU Oi 

_.***_^ .«•« 
^ovo^ vor<«c\jir\ cmkncvjkn h-ooto 

UN^ KNvo irvvo to ifN irv un^ in m ^ to js* 

IS »« 9 

** • S 

s 

^ ® • 

• 

f*-ONKNh- VO H mON 1-4 ovsr ON r4KNC\lO 

•4 *4 44 • • cvIrA4 • 4cJ4oJ 

pH 

M »4 0 

Pi O 

rH 

• • •• . • • 

• r4..« *fH.r4 

• • 

«d 

• 

4* 

0 

4» 

<rt 

s 

g* 

o 

0 

1 e 
e 0 

9 9 

• 

o 

' ON^ o r— r^ifNiHje* voooNin to^r^oN 

•H 1-4 

0 S 

•H O 

A 

ON 

• 

IfN 

to KNKNh- KNtO mm iH ON- 0 * m O O O 1-4 

H to to KN totoojvo P-KNtO^ KNKNKNtO 

iH r4 iH 

H 

4* 

o 

• 

VP 

r—r-HV 0 * o knvo ON p-onknio to^ ^-o 

..«• •••• 

OJ to ON^ ON ON KNVO K-ON^ KNKNKNON 

iH H 

•H 

9 

Vi 

B 

e 

u 

Vi 

1 

♦» 

• 

S • • •S e 

^ 02 
h s e K ^ 0 g 

0 e H 0 4 * o S 

0 0 p,^ o e 

9 Pi# h ^ 

P 0 

O 

#-i m ;0 m vocumh- vo knk-ih ON^-om 

• ••# *••• 

r4C\l iH HOJ CJ MCVJHKN CUOJ 

0 ^ ►* 

4» o *H L i0 

S £ ® 5 F 0 

0 2 • 0 P 

p« s -* 

K\ 

• 

O 

• 

f 4 (Vj .CM mH«-l€V m^J«-4^» 

• •«.. r4..p4 

• Vxi- 

• 

* 

« 

-i 

4> 

o 

KN 

o! 

OJ t—f— r4 knvo on r4mt0t0 ONONCVim 

4oj*4 oJo3*c3 rAoj4fA **c\!cJ 


■s 

5 

to 

• 

VO 

KN a\jt H OJ to r—VO to jt o\;t o vo to o 
«••• •«.. ««•« 
mr—mm mr-^vo vor^ONON ja'mmf^ 

9 

4> 

0 

4> 

CO 

Total. 

Irisona.. 

Arkaneae. 

District of Columbia 
Illinois. 

Kansas. 

Louislansu. 

Massachusetts. 

Missouri... 

Montana.. 

Nebraskeu. 

North Carolina,. 

Oklahoma.. 

South Dakota.. 

Utah. 

Vest Tirginia.. 

Wisconsin. 



3 

8 

2 


•s 

n 


4» 

a 

9 

o 

u 

9 

Pi 


• ITN 
O 


8 


O 
o 

i 9 

Pi^ 

m 

o • 

d • 


9 


-•g 

• iH 
tt O 
9 0 
tA »-• 



I 


Support not lac)cing» 0*X percent; not legally responeil)le, leee than 0*05 percent 
Support not lacking, 0*7 percent; not legally reeponelble, leee than 0*0^ percent 
Not legally reeponelhle. 

































































- 58 - 


Ta^)le 25._Eeason for lack of support or care liy the mother, according to reason for lack of support or care hy 

the father, ADC families, I6 States, October 1942 




Percent lacking the mother's support or care 
for specified reason 


Reason for lack of the father's 

ADC 

families 

Dead, incapacitated, 
and absent for other 
specified reason 

Needed 
in the 
home 

Unem¬ 

ployed 

or 

All 

support or care 

Total 

Dead 

Inca¬ 

paci¬ 

tated 

Absent, 

other 

speci¬ 

fied 

reason 

wlti 

insuf¬ 

ficient 

earn¬ 

ings 

other 

reasons 

1/ 

Total. 

138,060 

15.7 

6,8 

6.6 

2.3 

60.1 

22.7 

1.5 

Dead.. 

51,406 

15.0 

6.9 

7.0 

1.1 

57.4 

26.7 

.9 

Estranged from family 2 /. 

49.316 

17.6 

6.3 

7.4 

3.9 

52.6 

27.1 

2.7 

Incapacitated. 

30,537 

11.2 

4.8 

5.1 

2:5 

77.3 

11.3 

.2 

Imprisoned. 

2,809 

l 4 ,l 

8.3 

3 .‘^- 

67.Q 

18.2 

.7 

Serving in armed forces. 

546 

11.3 

3.1 

5.2 

3.0 

71.9 

15.3 

1.5 

ITot legally responsible. 

629 

1.6 

1.0 

.6 


89.7 

7.8 

.9 

.All other. 

2,817 

51.5 

37.8 

7.0 

6.7 

38. 8 

5.8 

3.9 

Unemployed or with insufficient earnings 

1.419 

‘+3.5 

28.6 

7.9 

7.0 

51.0 

5.0 

.5 

Absent, reason not specified. 

990 

, 61.8 

52.9 

3.2 


22.0 

6.0 

10.2 

Support not lacking. 

208 

18.3 

8.6 

2.9 

6.8 

67.^ 

l 4.4 


Needed in the home. 

200 

92.6 

58.0 

24.9 

9.7 

5.6 

1.8 



ly Absent for reasons not specified, not legally responsible, and support not lacking. 
2/ Includes divorce, desertion, separation, and the father not married to the mother. 


Table 26.—Reason for lack of support or care by the father, according to reason for lack of support or care by 

the mother, ADC families, 16 States, October 1042 


Reason for lack of the mother's 
support or care 

ADC 

families 


Percent 

lacking the father's support or care 
for specified reason 

Dead 

Es¬ 

tranged 

from 

family 

1/ 

Inca¬ 

paci¬ 

tated 

Im¬ 

pris¬ 

oned 

Serv¬ 
ing in 
armed 
forces 

Not 

legally 

respon¬ 

sible 

All 

other 

reasons 

2/ 

Total. 

138,060 

37.2 

35.8 

22.1 

2.0 

0.4 

0.5 

2.0 

Dead, incapacitated, and absent for other 









specified reason. 

21.703 

35.4 

4o.o 

15.8 

1.8 

.3 

( 3 ) 

6.7 

Dead. 

9.432 

37.5 

33.1 

15.3 

2.5 

.2 

.1 

11.3 

Incapacitated. 

9.114 

39.2 

4o.i 

17.2 

1.0 

.3 

( 3 ) 

2.2 

Absent, other reason. 

3.157 

18.1 

60.4 

12 . 9 

?. 1 

R 



Needed in the home. 

82.956 

; 35.6 

31.2 

28.4 


^ K 

.7 

1.3 

Unemployed or with insufficient earnings... 

31.356 

43.8 

42.6 

11.0 

1.6 

^ 1 

,2 

.5 

All other reasons 4 /. 

2,045 

23.6 

66.3 

3.1 

.9 


.3 

5.4 


1/ Includes divorce, desertion, separation, end the father not married to the mother. 

2 / Unemployed or with insufficient earnings, absent for reasons not specified, support not lacking, and needed in 
the home, 

3/ Less them 0,05 percent. 

^ Absent for reasons not specified, not legally responsible, and support not lacking. 

■A U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 0—1945' 


1 






















































Families Receiving 

Aid to Dependent Children 

October 1942 



Part 11. Family Income 




f-* 


liK 




muBRMiy Of 
CON6RE8S_ 
tEmSGCORO 

SEP4 ^945 

tsm -— 

tOVT. SOUiCI 


FEDERAL SECURITY AGENCY 

SOCIAL SECURITY BOARD 
Bureau of Public Assistance 



PUBLIC ASSISTANCE REPORT NO. 7 


























Federal Security Agency 
SOCIAL SECURITY BOARD 
Arthur J. Altmeyer, Chairman 
George E. Bigge Ellen S. Woodward 

Oscar M. Powell, Executive Director 


BUREAU OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 


Jane M. Hoey, Director 








CONTENTS 

■ ---c;:' ^ Page 

I. Introduction. 1 

II. Total Income of Families Receiving Aid to 

Dependent Children . 3 

Types and sources of income. 4 

Total cash income. 4 

State differences in total cash income • 9 

Relation of income and family 

composition. 10 

Total cash income of white and Negro 

families. 13 

III. Cash Income from Public Aid. 15 

Aid to dependent children. 15 

Otlier Dublic aid .. 17 

IV. Cash Income from Soui'ces Other Than Public Aid 21 

Income from earnings. 22 

Other income. 23 

V. Nonmonetary Income from Public Aid ...... 25 

Surplus commodities and related programs 25 

Medical care. 26 

VI. Nonmonetary Income from Sources Other Than 

Public Aid. 28 

VII. Summary.*. 30 

















I. INTRODUCTION 


Under the Social Seciirity Act, the Federal Govemraent makes grants- 
in-aid to States to assist them in financing programs of aid to dependent 
children. State public assistance agencies provide assistance to needy 
children deprived of parental support or care through the death, continued 
absence from home, or incapacity of a parent. The purpose of aid to depend¬ 
ent children is to ensure such children continuance of as normal a family 
life as is possible. Assistance is intended to enable the mother or other 
relative responsible for the supervision of the children to remain in the 
home to care for them and to enable children of school age to remain in 
school. These objectives can be realized for families v/ith dependent chil¬ 
dren only if their incomes from assistance end other sources are large 
enough to supply them with the essentials of living. 

Until now, any conclusions regarding the adequacy of aid to depend¬ 
ent children have necessarily been based on data on the amounts of assist¬ 
ance payments—even though assistance often supplements other family income 
and is not necessarily the sole source of support. To obtain information 
on the amounts that families receiving aid to dependent children have to 
live on, the Social Security Board planned a sample study of the incomes 
of families receiving aid to dependent children to be made on a voluntary 
basis by State public assistance agencies. This study v/as a part of a 
larger study of the characteristics of children receiving aid to dependent 
children, y The income study was made in the autumn months of 1942 in the 
following ei^t States: 2j 

Arkansas Massachusetts Montana Oklahoma 

District of Columbia ' Missouri North Carolina Wisconsin 

The year 1942 was the first full year of the Nation's participation 
in World War II and was characterized by expanding industrial production, 
mounting demands for manpower, and rising living costs. Tlie war economy 
had its impact on families receiving aid to'dependent children as on all 
groups in the population. New employment opportunities gave mothers and 
older children in families receiving aid to dependent children opportunity 
to increase their family income and to raise their standard of living, 
which in most instances was extremely low. The inadequacy of the incomes 
of families who were dependent in whole or in part on assistance had been 
sharply accentuated by the rapid rise in the cost of living. For the most 
part, public assistance agencies—despite decreases in the number of fami¬ 
lies on the rolls—had insufficient funds to adjust assistance payments 
upwards rapidly enough or in large enough amounts to keep pace with climb¬ 
ing prices. Many mothers and children were thus forced to work. The urge 
to participate in the war effort was an additional factor influencing some 
mothers and children to take advantage of job openings. 


1/ See Fam ilies Receiving Aid to Dependent C h ildren, October ^94 ^ . t . Psrt I 
RaceTsiiiT and Composition of Fami lies and Reasons for Dependen^, 

Public Assistance Report No. 7, Bureau of Public Assistance, Social 



obtain income data. 


- 1 - 








2 - 


In 1942 , earnings from employment were available to a larger portion 
of the families receiving aid to dependent children and constituted a larger 
share of their total incomes than would be possible except under conditions 
of acute labor shortage. The increase in family incomes from earnings was 
gained in many instances through the sacrifice of values which the aid to 
dependent children program is intended to assure. Many mothers who worked 
outside the home and who were unable to arrange for the care of their 
young children frequently left them for long hours without supervision. 

Many boys and girls who had been receiving aid to dependent children gave 
up school in order to work. Since many of these children will not return 
to school, their contribution to the family income during the war period 
may have been at the expense of preparation for earning a li'^ring in a more 
competitive labor market and may result in increased dependency at a later 
date. Thus, consideration of the adequacy of aid to dependent children 
should be directed toward both the total amount of income of families on 
the rolls and the sources of that income. 






II. TOTAL INCOME OF FAMILIES RECEIVING AID TO DEPENDENT CHILDREN 


In the autumn months of 19 ^k 2, when the largest part of the wartime 
rise in living costs had taken place, cash income averaged $63 in house¬ 
holds on the rolls of aid to dependent children in 8 States. ^ Many of 
these families also had some Income in kind. That from public sources was 
most frequently in the form of surplus food distributed under the Food 
Stamp Plan, then still in operation. Some had noncash income from private 
sources, such as farm or garden produce or living quarters given them rent- 
free or in return for services. For the group as a whole, however, it is 
apparent that even in this war year, when chances for work and hence total 
family resources were unusually great, children receiving aid in these 8 
States were living in homes where means were very limited. 

In these homes, the average family consisted of 4*5 persons, includ¬ 
ing the children for whom assistance was given, the mother or relative 
responsible for their care, and any other persons who lived in the same 
household, shared income, and were regarded as members of the family, ij 
In some households, the group approved for aid to dependent children un¬ 
doubtedly shared in the resources of other members; in some, persons other 
than those for whom the assistance payment was planned benefited from it. 

In such households, it is not possible to determine just what part of total 
1 income was available to the assistance unit. ^ Family income for the 
purposes of this report, therefore, is that of all members of the family 
and reflects the level of living in homes where income included aid to 
dependent children. 


2/ Arkansas, District of Columbia, Massachusetts, Missouri, Montana, 
North Carolina, Oklahoma, Wisconsin. In aU. States but Wisconsin, 
the data cover families receiving aid in October 1942; in Wisconsin, 
September 1942. 

ij For the purpose of this study, a family was defined as a group of 
persons living together and sharing a common income, which may be 
received by one member of the group or may result from pooling the 
income of several members. Ifemarried children and other relatives 
were counted as members of a family, if they were considered as part 
of the family group and economic unit and not as a separate family, 
even though they paid a definite amount for board and room instead 
of sharing a common family income. 

^ Parent, parents, or supervising relative and children approved for 
aid. 


- 3 - 






- 4 - 


The information here summarized for 8 States is the first which has 
become available on total income of families receiving assistance under the 
State-Federal program of aid to dependent children. Though the States are 
widely scattered and diverse, they include only a fraction of all States 
administering this type of aid. The findings of the study therefore do 
not necessarily reflect the situation of all families receiving aid to 
dependent children. 

Since aid is given to supplement whatever resoiirces families them¬ 
selves may have, total income in these households with dependent children 
represented many different combinations of income of various types and from 
various sources. 

Types and Sources of Income 

For the majority of the families in the 8 States combined, total in¬ 
come came from both public and private sources and included both cash and 
kind (table 1). All families, of courso, had cash income from aid to 
dependent children. About 68 percent received money from both public aid 
and other sources. More than half these families had nonmonetary income 
as well. Each of several tj^pes of nonmonetary income, such as food stamps, 
farm and garden produce, or housing, supplemented the cash income of more 
then one-fourth of the families (chart I). About 28 percent of the families 
had no cash income other than the ADC payment; more than half of these, 
however, had some nonmonetary income. Nearly 11 percent of all the families 
7 /ere wholly dependent on aid to dependent children. 

Total Cash Income 


In 7 States combined, families receiving aid to dependent children 
derived a little more than half their total cash income from aid to depend¬ 
ent children and nearly 40 percent from earnings; all other sources there¬ 
fore accounted for less than 10 percent. ^ 


^ Complete data on source of income for Missouri not available 









Table 1.—Percent of families on ADC rolls with and without nonmonetary Income, 
by source of cash income for g States, October 19^2 


5 


j 




»d «) w 

d ^ -M « 





3 -d a o 

OJ 

1 cvj o VO m CO m 



^ d > ^ 

• 

1 ••(!«••• 



o -S » •H d 
PS o 

CO 

' 1 rH fH rH rH 

V 



^ P< CD 









i 1 

•d «s 




^ ^ rt ^ 




0 k 

« P ® a 2 

o 

0 

,:i-C\ibOcnCUb0KM50 


G p 

^ f-i 

o d +» 5 •§ co 

VC 

OCOOCOOVD-d-O 


O <H 

a 

•rH 4) 

9 S ° H. 


VO CO ^ r<>-d- CO ^ 






e 

>* o 





>4 O 

•rt 

a ^ 

O -d ® IJ 'd 

9 §5.§-3 

o ft 

bO 

• 

fH 

r-i^ CO h-co h-r-o 

fH CO fH vO fH ro 

1 

O (0 




1 

£ Cl} 

S o 


ir> 

r^iTviPr^fH 



• 

• ••••••• 


O 



rH COVOVO ir>CO r<Mr\ 

•H 


o 

rH 

fH CO rH fH rH rH fH 

> 




CO 


fH 

ir\ 

CO K\UCMf\OVOCOVO 

q; 


cO 

• 


•H 


4> 

r- 

C0r~-O-d-VOrHrHC0 



o 

m 

r- uTivo vD ir\vo ^ vo 

•H 


EH 



tM 


•d ® « 

rt ® ® 



Vi 


3 ^ 'd 0) o 

fH 

1 ^ iH CO KACO 

o 


d > »H 

• 

1 •••»••• 



o *2 «<J d 

CO 

1 fH CO K>»C0 

-M 


PS o 



^ [ 

^ P p, ® 



C 



t> 




u 

<]> 

« s 

tJ ® 




S p 

3 o ® 2 •d 

QO 

cr»-d^ooor^coif^ 

O M 


# 

• ••••••• 


O <M 

o d -p ^ e aj 

9 g ° ^ 

1— 

cr* 1— CO r—^ iTvifN 

rH CO CO CO CO CO r<>CO 


^ (D 

a 

>» o 

CO 







o 


Cl) Ej 

_ ^ -H _ 





o d © nil'd 

r*- 

1 crwD o u^r^vo i— 


o 

a xi 

9 ^ ^ *d 

0 

I •••••#• 

1 rH rH CO fH 


o u 

a 0 ) 

® P 



d o 





o 

d 'd 

o ^ 

• 

crvo CO i^cor^i— o 


s 

0 d 

o 

-d* icS CO vo 1 ^ CO 


O CO 

•=< o 

fH 

fH iH iH 




ITk 

cor«-lr^lf^o-=^ coj^ 



• 

«••••••• 



4> 

CO 

r— CO cr\ oo co 



o 


CO -d ro u^ 



EH 




• 


• 

• 

• 

• 

• ©•••••• 




• 





© 

• •H •* •• •• 




© 

• ^jQ 




4> 

tg »•*••• 




CO 




© 

*» 

• iH****** 



4» 

Vi 

• ©•••cO** 



oO 


• o © • • d • • 



4> 

CO 

• 4> • • •H • • 



C/1 

. tH 43 • • rH • • 




•k 

• o © * o • • 




rH 

• © • CO| M • d 




© 

tt 43 d "H CD © fH 




4* 

©043>^COOS© 




O 

© nH o d d o d 




EC 

dd©o3^;dO 





343 ©©43 43 ©0 
i4©©©ddrH© 



1 


dfH ©fH O O^fH 
•iJPSSIS^O^ 


l/ Includes families with nonmonetary income valued at leas than $ 5 - 
^ Families receiving food stamps not included; data not available. 



























CHART L-PERCENT OF FAMILIES ON ADC ROLLS WITH CASH INCOME AND 
NONMONETARY INCOME FROM PUBLIC AID AND OTHER SOURCES, 8 STATES, OCT 1942 

PERCENT PERCENT 






FOOD SURPLUS MEDICAL PROCESSED OTHER FARM AND HOUSING OTHER 

STAMPS COMMODITIES CARE CLOTHING-WPA GARDEN PRODUCE 































































m 


- 7 -• 


Percent of 

Soiirce of income total cash income 

I 

Total, 7 States. 1QQ,0 


Aid to dependent children. 51,3 

Earnings. 39.5 

Other public assistance 2/ . 2.7 

Contributions from relatives. 2.3 

Pensions, social insurance, etc. 1,5 

Investments or property. 1.1 

Other sources. 1.6 


The average family receiving aid to dependent children had an income 
of $ 62.88 in cash in the survey month, $ 31-86 of which represented the as¬ 
sistance payment and $ 2.10 other public aid; $ 28.92 was from earnings, con¬ 
tributions from relatives, social insurance benefits, investments or property, 
and all other sources of monetary income (chart II). 

Conclusions as to whether the incomes of families receiving aid to 
dependent children are large or small can be drawn only by comparing the in¬ 
comes of'these families v/ith information on what it would cost them to buy 
the goods and services deemed necessary for healthful growth and develop¬ 
ment. Unfortunately, no information is available by Y/hich the adequacy or 
inadequacy of the incomes of families on the AUC rolls can satisfactorily 
be measured. In 1942, however, the Bureau of Labor Statistics published cur¬ 
rent information on the cost of living at a maintenance level of a 4 -person 
manual worker^s family in large cities. The maintenance budget—developed 
by the Works Progress Administration—is described as not so liberal as that 
for a ’’health and decency” level which the skilled worker may hope to obtain, 
but it affords more than a ’’minimiun of subsistence” living. The maintenance 
level is below what may be considered a satisfactory' American standard of 
living. ^ 


ij Cash income from public assistance throughout the remainder of this 
report includes the value of orders on vendors for subsistence goods, 
and the value of commodities, other than siirplus commodities. Families 
with such income are included with those receiving cash income from pub¬ 
lic assistance. It should be noted, hoY^ever, that less than 2 percent 
of the ADC families received this type of income, and it represented 
only 0.8 percent of the total income of all families from assistance. 

^ For a definition of the maintenance level, see Stecker, Margaret Loomis, 
Intercity Differences in Costs of Living. March 1935. 59 Cities, pp. XII- 
XIV, Research Monograph XII, Vforks Progress Administration, 


651052 0 - 45 -2 
















CHART n.-AVERA6E AMOUNT OF CASH INCOME PER FAMILY ON ADC ROLLS 
BY SPECIFIED TYPE OF INCOME, 8 STATES, OCT. 1942 


-'8 












































































































- 9 - 


The average family- receiving aid to dependent children is not a 
2-parent, 2-child family. It consists of 4.5 persons and includes 1.7 
persons 18 years of age and over and 2.8 children under 18 years of age. 
In 1942, the Consumer Income and Demand Branch of the Office of Price 
Administration developed a methodology for deriving from the cost of -the 
maintenance budget for the 4-person family with both parents in the home, 
the cost of living for a wife and for each child in a family in which -the 
father is absent. This information is available as of December 15, 1942, 
for four cities in States participating in the study of ADC incomes, and 
is given below. 2/ 


Boston. 

District of Columbia 

Milwaukee.. 

St. Louis. 


Estimated monthly cost 
of maintenance budget 



Each 

Wife 

child 

$64.26 

$19.53 

66.80 

20.30 

62.73 

19.06 

62.93 

19.12 


On the assumption that the adults in the ADC families other than the 
mother or other person supervising the children are for the most part older 
boys and girls—and to err on the conservative side—the cost of living for 
the 4.5-person family has been computed by adding to the cost of living for 
a wife the cost for 3.5 children (of y/hom 2.8 children are under 18 years 
of age). This gives a crude estimate of the monthly cost of living at a 
maintenance level in the 4 cities for the average ADC family of 4.5 persons, 
as follows: 


Boston.$133 Milwaiikee. $129 

District of Columbia. 138 St. Louis. 130 

It may be assumed that living costs are somewhat lower in rural than in 
urban areas, and consequently these figures may to some extent overstate 
the average cost of the maintenance budget for the 4.5-person family in 
the States of Massachusetts, Wisconsin, and Missouri. They afford, how¬ 
ever, perspective for considering the incomes of families on the ADC rolls 
and for making some rough judgments as to their adequacy. 

State Differences in Total Cash Income 

Considerable difference existed among the States in both the aver¬ 
age amount and sources of the cash income of families recei-ving aid "to 
dependent children (table 2). 


^ Hearings Before the Committee on Military Affairs. House of Represen¬ 

tatives. Seventy-eighth Congress. First Session, on S. 1279 
Various House Bills , p. 60. 

















- 10 - 


Table 2.—Average amount of total cash income per family on ADC rolls and 
percent of such income from specified source, 

8 States, October 1942 


'State 

Average 

total 

cash 

income 

Percent of total cash income 
from specified source 

All 

sources 

ADC 

Other 

public 

aid 

Sources 
other than 
public aid 

Total,8 ,States... 

$62.88 

100.0 

50.7 

3.3 

' 46.0 

Arkansas.*. 

29.71 

100.0 

52.6 

.1 

47.3 

District of Columbia.... 

63.42 

100.0 

61.2 

1.8 

37.0 

Massachusetts.. 

100.92 

100.0 

62.0 

2.1 

35.9 

Missouri. 

65.27 

100,0 

43.1 

3.9 

48.0 

Montana. 

60.07 

100.0 

52.7 

8.3 

39.0 

North Carolina. 

44.20 

100.0 

33.9 

1.9 

59.2 

Oklahoma.. 

46.85 

100.0 

43.1 

4.8 

47.1 

Wisconsin... 

86.84 

100.0 

46.4 

3.6 

50.0 


State differences in income from sources other than the ADC payment were less 
marked than differences in the ADC average payment. Consequently, State 
variations in total cash income can be attributed largely to variations from 
State to State in the amount of the ADC payment. 

States also differ greatly in the distribution of the amounts of cash 
income of individual families receiving aid'(chart III). In some States, 
money Incomes were concentrated at very low amounts; in others, at consider¬ 
ably higher levels. More than half the families in Arkansas, North Carolina, 
and Oklahoma had less than $40 per month in cash while in Wisconsin almost 
half had over $70 and in Massachusetts, over $80. The higher amoimt in 
Massachusetts reflects in part the policy of the State in including medical 
needs in the requirements of recipients in determining the amount of the 
assistance payment. 

Relation of Income and Family Composition 

The significance of the average amoimt of cash income within a State, 
and of the differences in State averages must be considered in relation to 
the size and composition of the families receiving aid to dependent children 
(table 3) • The size of the family affects the extent of its need, and the 
composition of the family affects its potential earning capacity. Those 
factors, therefore, affect both the amount of the income derived from assist¬ 
ance and that derived from private earnings. 

In the 8 States combined, the, average family receiving aid to depend¬ 
ent children was composed of 4.5 persons. In North Carolina, the average was 
4.9 perspns, and in Massachusetts, where average total cash income, including 





















- 11 - 


CHART m-PERCENT OF FAMILIES ON ADC ROLLS WITH 
SPECIFIED AMOUNTS OF CASH INCOME. 8 STATES. OCT. 1942 


PERCENT 



30 


20 


MASSACHUSETTS 



30 

20 

10 

0 

40 


30 


DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 



NORTH CAROLINA 



20 

10 


0 


































































- 12 - 


Table 3*—Average size of family, maximum age for ADC, and percent 
of families with persons in specified age groups other 
than children approved for aid and person responsible 
for their care, for 8 States, October 1942 


State 

Average 

number 

of 

persons 

per 

family 

Maximum 
age for 
ADC y 

Percent of families with— 

No person 
other than 
assistance 
unit y 

Other persons 

Under 

18 years 
or 65 years 
and over, 
only 

18-64 
years y - 

Total, 8 States.. 

4.5 

— 

Ug.2 

18.3 

33.5 

Arkansas. 

4.5 

18 

57.8 

17.1 

25.1' 

District of Columbia. 

4.7 

16 

bl.k 

15.5 

17.1 

Massachusetts. 

4.1 

18 

65.0 

9.1 

25.9 

Missouri. 

4.6 

16 

‘*3.3 

24.2 

32.5 

Montana.. 

4.2 

18 

67.7 

11.0 

21.3 

North Carolina. 

4.9 

18 

3H.I 

28.7 

37.2 

Oklahoma. 

4.8 

16 

39.7 

18.9 

41.4 

Wisconsin. 

^.3 

21 

53.8 

11.4 

3^.8 


^ Regular school attendance was required for children l6 and 17 in all 
States, except Wisconsin, vdiich aided children of tho'se ages and in 
Missouri for children l4 and 15- Wisconsin permitted counties to 
discontinue aid at l6 at the discretion of the local agency. 

2/ Children approved for aid and parents or other relative in loco . 
parentis. 

2/ In a few instances, some families classified as having persons 18-64 
years of age also contained persons under 18, and/or persons 65 
years of age and over. 




















- 13 - 


the ADC payment, was twice as high, families averaged only 4.1 persons. In 
7 of the 8 States, nearly 40 percent of the families consisted of only one 
parent or other supervising relative and the children approved for aid; in 
the District of Columbia, Massachusetts, and Montana, more than half were 
composed of only one adult and the children approved for aid. Additional 
groups of families, ranging from less than 6 percent of the total in North 
Carolina to 16 percent in Arkansas, included both parents, one of whom usually 
was disabled. 

Differences in the amount of the income of families in the various 
States were affected by State differences in the maximum age at which chil¬ 
dren were eligible for this type of assistance and in the proportion of fami¬ 
lies including persons other than parents or another supervising relative 
and the children approved for aid. The age through which children are eli¬ 
gible for aid to dependent children ranged from 15 years in the District of 
Columbia, Missouri, and Oklahoma to 20 years in Wisconsin. Because the maxi¬ 
mum assistance payment is usually determined by the number of eligible chil¬ 
dren in the family. States that provide for the eligibility of older children 
naturally can make larger payments to some families than States having a 
lower maximum age. 

A little more than half the families included persons other than the 
children approved for aid and the parents or another relative vho was 
responsible for care of children. One-third of all the families included 
such other members in the ages 18-64, and about one-fifth had other members 
who were under age 18 or aged 65 or more. Families with other members of 
working age obviously had a greater opportunity for income from earnings 
than those consisting of only the children approved for aid and the parent 
or other relative who cared for them. 

Total Cash Income of White and Negro Families 

The greater prevalence of need among minority races was discussed in 
Part I of this report* It is well known that there is a wide variation in 
income from private sources among various races. It is important to deter¬ 
mine whether there are also significant differences in total income among 
families of different races receiving aid to dependent children. In all 
States except Arkansas for which this computation could be made, Negro fami¬ 
lies had a lower average total cash income than white families (table 4)* 



_ u - 


Table 4«—^Average total cash income of white and Negro families on ADC rolls, 
and average size of such families, for 8 States, October 1942 


State 

Average total cash income 
1 

Average size 

of family 

White 3/ 

Negro 

White iJ 

Negro 

Total, 8 States.. 

171.50 

^$67.59 

4.5 

4.8 

Arkansas. 

29.08 

35.05 

4.5 

4.8 

District of Columbia... 

74.59 

62.79 

4.5 

4.8 

Massachusetts. 

103.91 

85.71 

4.1 

3.8 

Missouri.. 

70.14 

67.50 

4.6 

4.5 

Montana.. 

60.83 

(3) 

4.2 

(3) 

North Carolina. 

46.20 

41.51 

4.7 

5.4 

Oklahoma.. 

48.18 , 

‘ 44.27 

4.8 

4.8 

Wisconsin. 

92.62 

(3) 

4.3 

4.0 


“iJ Races other than white or Negro are included with white. 

Adjusted to compensate for variation among States in proportion of Negroes 
in recipient population. 

2J Not computed; base too small. 


In States with a lower average for Negro families, the differences betT^een the 
average for Negro and that for white families ranged from less than $3 in 
Missouri to about $18 in Massachusetts. In Arkansas, the average-for Negro 
families was about $6 more than that for white families. The lower average 
total cash income of Negro families in Massachusetts can be explained in 
part by the fact that there were relatively fewer large Negro families in 
that State. On the other hand, the higher average for Negro families in 
Arkansas is partly explained by the greater average size of Negro families 
in that State, as compared Ydth Thite families. 

Comparison of total cash income of families of one race and of fami¬ 
lies of another race implies comparison of the relative level of living of 
the two groups. At best, average total cash income serves as an extremely 
rough basis for such comparison* It does not take into account family size 
or composition, both of which affect the need of the family and its ability 
to produce income. Without more information than is available, definite 
conclusions cannot be drawn regarding the relative income levels of the two 
racial groups. In the 8 States combined, Negro families had an average total 
cash income of about $68, Ydiile that for white families was about $71. 10 / 


10/ The average for Negro families has been adjusted to compensate for the 
weighting that results from the marked variation among States in the 
proportion of Negroes in ihe recipient population. To adjust for this 
weighting, the average was computed on the assimiption that as many 
Negro as white families in each State received assistance. 






















III. CASH INCOME FROM PUBLIC AID 


Income in cash from public aid was obtained from aid to dependent 
chil^en, from payments for other types of public assistance, and in a 
few instances from WPA earnings and other programs financed by public 
funds. 

Aid to Dependent Children 

Aid to dependent children is provided in the form of a money pay¬ 
ment to be spent as the parent or other supervising adult thinks best. 
Payment of assistance in cash enables the family to use this income just 
as it would use earnings or other income from private sources. It thus 
can buy goods and services through regular trade channels without being 
identified as receiving assistance. 

t 

Aid to dependent children was the most important single source of 
cash income and represented almost 94 percent of all cash income from 
public aid. The median payment was $25, in the 8 States combined, and 
ranged from a little more than half this amount in Arkansas and North 
Carolina to more than |60 in Massachusetts. 11/ The range in median pay¬ 
ments for families with 6 or •more children approved for aid was even 
greater than that for all families. For these large families, the median 
amounts ranged from $24 in Arkansas and $30 in North Carolina to $110 
in Massachusetts (table 5). Median payments in the District of Columbia 
and Missouri were undoubtedly influenced by the maximum limits in these 
States. Relatively few payments were made at the maximum in Arkansas 
and Oklahoma. Massachusetts and Wisconsin do not have maxiraums. 12/ 


11/ To ensure greater comparability in the data, workers were instructed 
to report the amounts of the regular monthly payments, excluding 
any amo\mts added to the regular payment for the month of the study 
to meet such special emergency needs as medical services or, in a 
few instances, burials. Such additional payments were made in two 
States as follows: 


Percent of families receiving specified amounts 
of additional payments from ADC funds 


'state 

Total 

Less than 
$10.00 

$10.00-24.99 

$25.00 
or more 

Massachusetts 

12.8 

9.3 

2.5 

1.0 

Wisconsin 

2.9 

2.1 

.8 

(*) 


(*) Less than 0.05 percent. 

12/ Maximums on payments in October 1942 in Arkansas, Missouri, Montana, 
North Carolina, and Oklahoma were $18 for the first child and $12 for 
each additional child. The maximum payment to a family, however, was 
limited to $30 in Arkansas, to $60 in Missouri, and to $65 in North 
Carolina. Maximums in the District of Columbia were $30 for the first 
, - child and $6 for each additional child, with a family maximum of $60. 













- 16 - 


Table 5.—Median ADC payment, excluding amounts for special needs, by number 
of children approved for aid, for 8 States, October 1942 


State 

All 

families 

Families with specified number of 
children approved for aid 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 or 
more 

Total, 8 States... 

§25 

$18 

$26 

$35 

140 

$45 

$58 

Arkansas.. 

15 

12 

U 

16 

18 

20 

24 

District of Columbia... 

42 

30 

36 

42 

48 

54 

60 

Massachusetts. 

63 

47 

64 

77 

89 

95 

110 

Missoiori. 

30 

18 

30 

42 

54 

60 . 

60 

Montana.... 

30 

18 

30 

42 

50 

55 

60 

North Carolina. 

15 

12 

15 

18 

20 

25 

30 

Oklahoma. 

18 . 

13 

21 

28 

34 

41 

50 

Wisconsin... 

38 

23 

37 

47 

54 

60 

71 


In each of the 8 States, the average ADC payment to Negro families 
differed little from that to white families. For Negro families, the aver¬ 
age ranged from about $16 in Arkansas to more than $65 in Massachusetts; 
for white families, from less than $16 in Arkansas to almost $63 in Massa¬ 
chusetts. Average payments for Negro families were higher than for white 
families in Arkansas and the District of Columbia, but the average Negro 
family was larger in those States than the average white family. In Missouri, 
Negro families were smaller and received a lower average payment than white 
families. The average payment for white and for Negro families in each of 
the States was as follows: 



White 13/ 

Negro 

Total, 8 States.... 

$33.39 

$34.00 

Arkansas.. 

15.96 

16.04 

District of Columbia.... 

38.58 

40.32 

Massachusetts. 

62.98 

65.15 

Missouri.. 

31.68 

31.38 

Montana..... 

32.13 

(15) 

North Carolina. 

17.99 

16.77 

Oklahoma. 

22.92 

20.92 

Wisconsin... 

40.59 

(15) 


13/ Races other than white or Negro are included with white. 

14/ Adjusted to compensate for variation among States in proportion of 
Negroes in recipient population. 

15/ Not computed, base too small. 

































- 17 - 


The average for Negro families in the 8 States combined was $34, while that 
for white families was more than $33. 

Other Public Aid 

Public aid other than aid to dependent children was relatively unim¬ 
portant as a source of money income. Such aid accounted for only slightly 
more than 6 percent of the cash income from public aid (table 6). 

Table 6,—Percentage distribution of cash income of families on ADC rolls, 
by type of public aid for 8 States, October 1942 


State 

Total 


Type of public 

aid 


ADC 

OAA 

AB 

GA 

WPA 

Other 

Total, 8 States.. 

100.0 

93.8 

3.7 

0.2 

1.1 

0.9 

0.3 

Arkansas.. .. 

100.0 

99.9 

(1) 


(1) 

.1 


District of Columbia.. 

100.0 • 

97.2 

1.8 

.7 

(1) 

.3 

— 

Massachusetts. 

100,0 

96.7 

1.8 

.2 

.4 

.5 

.4 

Missoisri,... •, 

100.0 

92.6 

3.6 

— 

2.3 

1.2 

.3 

Montana. 

100.0 

86.3 

6.1 

.6 

6.0 

.6 

.4 

North Carolina. 

100.0 

96.0 

1.7 

.3 

.7 

1.1 

.2 

Oklahoma. 

100.0 

91.0 

6.9 

.2 

.7 

1.1 

.1 

Wisconsin.. 

100.0 

92.8 

4.5 

.5 

1.1 

1.0 

.1 


Less than 0.05 percent. 


Only 9 percent of the families received such income, and these payments 
represented only 3,3 percent of the total cash income of all families. In 
all the States except Montana, relatively few families received other pub¬ 
lic aid in cash; the proportion ranged from 0,2 percent in Arkansas to 13 
percent in Missouri and Wisconsin, In Montana, however, about 26 percent 
of the families received such public aid (table 7), Because some of the 
other public aid was paid to family members other than the payee for aid to 
dependent children, the additional income may not always have been avail¬ 
able to the dependent children and the parent or relative caring for them. 
In the families receiving other aid, however, it represented a substantial 
addition to total family income. 






















~ 18 - 


Table 7.—Percent of families on ADC rolls receiving other cash income from 
specified type of public aid, for eight States, October 1942 


State 

One 

or 

more 

types 

of 

addi¬ 

tional 

public 

aid 

Percent of families receiving 
one type of additional 
public aid 

Two 

or 

more 

types 

of 

addi¬ 

tional 

public 

aid 

OAA 

AB 

GA 

WPA 

Other 

public 

aid 

Total, 8 States. 

9.2 

4.8 

0.4 

2.3 

0.6 

0.6 

0.5 

Arkansas. 

.2 

(1) 


.1 

.1 

^ , 


District of Columbia. 

3.9 

2.5 

.8 

.1 

.4 

■ 

.1 

Massachusetts. 

6.0 

3.1 

.5 

1.2 

.4 

.4 

.4 

Missouri. 

13.1 

5.9 

.3 

4.4 

1.0 

.2 

1.3 

Montana.. 

25.7 

8.7 

.6 

15.1 

.3 

.5 

.5 

North Carolina. 

6.2 

2.8 

.4 

1.6 

.6 

.6 

.2 

Oklahoma... 

S.5 

5.6 

.3 

.2 

.6 

1.6 

.2 

Wisconsin.. 

13.0 

7.2 

.9 

3.6 

.9 

.1 

.3 


'ij Less than 0.05 percent. 


Old-age assistance was the most common type of additional public aid 
in cash. The proportion of families receiving old-age assistance ranged 
from less than 1 percent in Arkansas to 9 percent in Montana. Fifteen per¬ 
cent of the families in Montana received general assistance. This type of 
assistance was received by some families, also, in each of the other States. 
A few families received aid to the blind, ISPA earnings, or some other public 
aid in cash. None of these types was received by much more than 1 percent 
of the families in any of the States. 

Whether families received assistance in addition to aid to depend¬ 
ent children was determined by the composition of the family, agency policy, 
and the adequacy of agency funds. Such other payments were more frequent 
in families with both parents than in those with one parent, and were 
relatively more frequent in families that included persons in addition to 
the parent or parents and the children who had been approved for aid 
(table 8). In the States in Tdiich ADC payments were limited to the require¬ 
ments of the payee and of the approved children, the presence of additional 
needy persons in the family increased the need for additional assistance. 

In most States, it also increased the possibility that some member of the 
family was eligible for another type of aid. 






















Table 8.—Percent of families on ADC rolls with other public aid in cash, by type 

of family, for 8 States, October 19^2 


- 19 - 



u 

o 

o 

4 * 

«> 

CQ 

ce 

,o 

♦ 

0) 

TJ rH 
0> ^ 
42 <£ 

rH 
ft •H 

g 0$ 

O ► 

o cS 

4 » +2 

o o 
tzi 





















- 20 - 


Statutory limits on ADC payments in 6 of the 8 States made it impos¬ 
sible to meet the full amount of the need of the dependent children in 
some families. Montana, however, was the only one of these States provid-. 
ing general assistance to any substantial extent to meet requirements 
exceeding the maximum payment for aid to dependent children. This policy 
largely accounts for the fact that in Montana, 20.4 percent of families 
consisting of only one parent and the children approved for aid received 
another type of payment. In Massachusetts and Wisconsin, the absence of 
State maximimis made it possible to meet the full amount of need through 
the ADC payment. 






\ 






IV. CASH INCOME FROM SOURCES OTHER THAN PUBLIC AID 


A substantial share of the income of the families included in the 
study was received in cash from private sources, such as earnings, cash 
contributions from friends or relatives, and income from property. 

These families also had small amounts of cash income from public sources, 
such as old-age and survivors insurance and unemployment compensation. 

For convenience, both these types of income will be referred to as cash 
income from sources other than public aid. 

Inevitably an inquiry made during wartime, when many persons of 
marginal employability had jobs, reveals greater earnings and a higher 
ratio of such cash income in relation to assistance than would be found 
under less favorable economic conditions. 

More than two-thirds of all families on ADC rolls of the 8 States 
had some cash income from sources other than public aid. Massachusetts 
had the smallest proportion of families with such income, less than one- 
half. At the other extreme were Arkansas and North Carolina with four- 
fifths. While a substantial proportion of the families had cash income 
from sources other than public aid, such income represented a much smaller 
proportion of all cash income. This is true both in the 8 States combined 
and in each of the States. In each of the States except North Carolina 
and Wisconsin, and in the 8 States combined, sources other than public aid 
furnished less than half the cash income of the ADC families. 

Cash income from sources 
other thain public aid 




Percent 


Percent 

of total 


of total 

cash income 


families 

of all 

State 

receiving 

families 

Total, 8 States.. 

68.1 

46.0 

Arkansas... 

79.9 

47.3 

District of Columbia.. 

61.2 

37.0 

Massachusetts.. 

45.1 

35.9 

Missouri....... 

.. 75.7 

4S.0 

Montana.... 

.. ■ 62.8 . 

39.0 

North Carolina... 

79.5 

59.2 

Oklahoma.. 

64.5 

47.1 

Wisconsin. 

.. 72.0 

50.0 


- 21 - 

















- 22 - 


Income from Earnings 

Earnings constituted the most common type of cash income from sources 
other than public aid. About tliree-fifths of the families had some earn¬ 
ings, including payments from boarders or lodgers, and proceeds from the 
sale of crops as well as wages. 16/ 

Arkansas, Missouri, and North Carolina reported cash income from 
private emplo3nnent for spproximately 70 percent of the families on ADC 
rolls. North Carolina not only had the second largest proportion of 
families with income from earnings but was also second among the S States 
in the proportion of families with persons 18-64 years of age, other than 
parents, or the adult in loco parentis (37.2 percent). In this State, 
therefore, the larger percentage of potential wage earners may account 
to some extent for the greater proportion of families with income from 
employment. It may be assumed that in many instances, especially in 
Arkansas and North Carolina, aid to dependent children was inadequate to 
meet the family* s needs and the employment of older children, and fre¬ 
quently of the mother, became necessary particularly as living costs rose*. 
Arkansas and North Carolina had the largest proportion of v/orking mothers— 
46.8 and 40.0 percent, I'especlively. These percentages are 9 and 8 times 
that of Massachusetts, which had the lowest proportion of employed mothers 
and the highest median payment for aid to dependent children. 

In Arkansas and North Carolina, average earnings in the families 
with such income were ^17.00 and $33.40^ respectively. Arkansas had the 
lowest average earnings as well as the lowest average ADC payment. North 
Carolina, on the other hand, was the only State where earnings averaged 
nearly twice the ADC payment. 

Average 


State ea^mings 


Total, 7 States 17/ $43>33 


Arkansas. 17.00 

District of Columbia.... 38.4^ 

Massachusetts. 98.00 

Montana. 39.26 

North Carolina. • 33.40 

Oklahoma. 33.00 

Wisconsin. 61.93 


Massachusetts, where the smallest proportion of families had earnings, 
shov/ed the highest average earnings of any State for such families, 
namely, $98.00, doubtless in part because of higher wage standards and 
levels. 


16/* For some families in a few States, income from the sale of crops in 
the study month was not prorated on a 12-month basis and thus may 
have included a substantial proportion.of annual income from such 
sales. 

17/ Data for Missouri not available. 
















- 23 - 


Other Income 


After earnings, help from relatives outside the household and from 
friends was the most common type of cash income other than public aid. 

Less than 10 percent of the families, however, benefited from such con¬ 
tributions. Income from the ownership of real or personal property, 
pensions, dependents^ allowances, and so on, were even rarer sources of 
cash income (table 9)* Since servicemen*s allowances are much higher than 
the payments permissible under the standards of aid to dependent children, 
it is not surprising that many families in receipt of allowances are in¬ 
eligible for aid to dependent children. The payment to a serviceman*s 
wife and one child is $80 a month as compared y/ith the maximums of $30 
payable to a mother and one child under aid to dependent children in 
Arkansas, Missouri, Montana, North Carolina, and Oklahoma. 




Table 9*—Percent of families on ADC rolls with cash income of specified type from sources other 

than public aid, for 8 States, October 19^2 


- 24 - 


• 


K^ 

0 

h- 


m 

ITv 

CVJ 

1 

KV 

eo 

4 

• 

• 

• 


• 

• 

• 

1 

• 


rH 

rH 

• ir\ 

K> 



rH 


1 


> 

vr> 

rH 





• 




• 



C\J 

to 


h- 

IfV 

! 

1 

to 

05 

« 

• 

# 

• 

• 

• 

• 

i 

1 

• 


to 



rH 


rH 


1 

1 


M 

ir\ 










0 











• 

CVi 


ir\ 

r- 


to 



1 

rH 

0 

• 

• 

• 

• 


♦ 

• 

rH 

1 

• 

• 

0 


CVJ 



rH 



1 


!zi 


iH 









• 

cr» 


0 



IfN 

0 

rH 


CVJ 


• 

• 

e 

• 


• 

• 

• 

rH 

• 

d 


rH 

rH 

to 


rH 

rH 



rH 

0 


rH 

rH 




















cu 


r*~ 

•> 

rH 



to 

rH 

rH 

0 


• 

• 

♦ 

« 


• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

0 

cr» 

0 

cu 

<VJ 






CVJ 


KO 

. rH 









• 


IC\ 

CTi 

CTi 


0 

cr\ 


1 

00 

m 

• 

• 

• 

• 


• 

9 

rH 

1 

• 

OB 




rH 


rH 

CVl 


1 

rH 

05 

K\ 










S 











• 

rH 



0 


r<> 

to 

rH 

1 

cr\ 

0 

• 

• 

• 

• 


• 

# 

• 

1 

• 

e 

to 



rH 



rH 


) 


0 


rH 









• 

C\J 

ir> 


irv 


VP 

rH 

rH 

CVJ 

KV 

M 

• 

# 

• 

• 


• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

U 


cr» 

KD 




















cu 

rH 


cr\ 


rH 

0 

rH 


(TV 

o 5 

• 

e 

• 

• 


• 

• 

• 

rH 


+» 

o^ 

CTi 

to 

fH 


rH 

rH 




0 











El 












• 

• 

• 

• 

« 

d • 

• 

• 

• 

• 


• 

* 

• 

0 ) 

® 

•H • 

• 

• 

• 

• 


• 

• 

W • 

d 

0 

• 

• 

« 

• 

« 


• 

• 

+» • 

0 

d 

d • 

• 

• 

• 

• 


® • 

• 

d • 

•ri 

a 

® • 

CD • 

(0 

>> • 

• 


43 • 

• 

® • 

w 

> 

a • 

Vi • 

4a 

0 • 

• 


05 • 

• 

a • 

d 

0 

• 

0 • 

•H 

d • 

♦ 

ea ffi ® 

> • * 

a 

4a • 

® 

rH 


> 


® • 



•H 0 

0 

w • 

Pi 

rH 

0 • 

h 4 • 

® 

«»D • 

• 

0 43 « 

Vi 4 » 

u 

® • 


c 3 

0 

^ • 

d 

(h * 

• 


Pi ® 

'H 

► • 

Vi 


m • 

M • 

® 

® • 

• 

•• 


U • 

d • 

0 

-d 

4a w 

d • 

,0 

a * 

• 

0 ® •§ 

a • 

Wo* 

•H >* 


d 

d 0 

CD • 


<D • 

• 

S Q, 

0 4a 

d • 

4 * 

d 

® 

® 0 

• 

4a 

e 

• 

® 0 ^ 

Vi d 

0 w • 

a 

0 


Tj Vi 

•d ® 

d 

Vi • 

• 

8* SJ d 

«H ® 

•H ® • 

0 ® 

•H 

w 

d 0 

d 0 

® 

OO CD 

• 

*>» d a 

I 

4 * ► « 

^ Pi 

4a 

4a 

® Ch 

® d 

a 

^ 4 ^ 

• 

EH •H S 

® ^ 

d -H -rt 

<H 0 

05 

d 

Pi 

a 


•rH 

• 

4 ^ 


,Q +» fl 


CD 

® 

® 'd 

® H 

0 

fH Ch 

• 


W rH 

•H ® ® 

® Pi 

d 

a 

'd ® 

M d 

rH 

05 ® 

« 


tJ & 

rH nH 

a . 

® 

4a 

g 

d « 

Pi 

p d 

u 


d a. 

4 * ® 

0 Vi 

Pi 

0 

0 P 

I d 

a 

® ® 

® 


Vi ® 

d Vi <M 

0 0 

a 

rH 

4a c 6 

'd "H 

® 


jd 


CO 

0 

d 

0 

rH 


rH 

d 

® 

4a 


w 

0 

t-H 

0 

■*A 


0 

t> * 


0 


l/ Less than O.O 5 percent. 






















V. NONMONETARY INCOME FROM PUBLIC AID 


More than half the families receiving aid to dependent children in 
the 8 States had some form of nonmonetary income from public aid. The 
proportion of families with this type of income was as follows: 

Percent of 


State families 


Total, 8 States.... 56.2 

Arkansas. 87.1 

District of Columbia. 84.2 

Massachusetts. 75.3 

Missouri. 48,3 

Montana. 51.8 

North Carolina. 43.6 

Oklahoma. 46.4 

Wisconsin. 56.7 


SuiT>lus Commodities and Related Programs 

Surplus food provided through the Food Distribution Administration 
of the U.S. Department of Agricultiire was the most frequent type of non¬ 
monetary aid received by these families. The proportion of families 
receiving free food either through the Stamp Plan or through direct dis¬ 
tribution of surplus agricultural products ranged from about 42 percent in 
North Carolina and Oklahoma to more than 96 percent in Massachusetts 
(table 10). Nearly one-third of the families in the 8 States participated 
in the Stamp Plan, buying orange stamps in amounts presumably equal to 
their ^normal” food purchases and thus becoming entitled to free blue stamps 
of equal value exchangeable for food to supplement purchases. The Stamp 
Plan was not Statevdde in 6 of the 8 States. Nearly one-fourth of the fami¬ 
lies in these States received surplus foods through direct distribution. 

Surplus-food distribution was fairly substantial in amount as well 
as in extent. Although the value of such foods was not reported in this 
study, information from the Food Distribution Administration shows that 
the average value of the free stamps issued in December 1942 to families 
receiving aid to dependent children was between $10 and $15 in each of the 
States operating under the Stamp Plan except Massachusetts, where it was 
$19. 


In Arkansas and North Carolina, a few families received cotton stamps 
in the month of the study, although in most parts of the country the cotton 
stamp program had been suspended. Clothing produced on WPA projects was 
distributed to some families in each State and to about two-fifths of the 
families in the District of Columbia and Montana, 


- 25 - 













- 26 - 


Table 10*—Percent of families on ADC rolls vdth specified type of 
nonmonetary income from public sources, 
for 3 States, October 1942 


State 

Surplus 

commodities 

Food 

stamps 

Cotton 

stamps 

WPA 

processed 

clothing 

Other 

Total, 8 States. 

23.2 

32.5 


8.8 

1.0 

Arkansas. 

37.5 

48.4 

.2 

4.9 

4.7 

District of Columbia. 

82.6 

— 

— 

39.0 

— 

Massachusetts. 

49.3 

47.1 

— 

14.8 

.6 

Missouri. 

26.5 

17.1 

— 

11.1 

.2 

Montana.. 

7.0 

2/47.8 

— 

40.6 

1.2 

North Carolina....... 

25.3 

16.4 

.1 

6.2 

.4 

Oklahoma. 

.9 - 

40.9 

— 

4.9 

1.5 

Wisconsin.. 

19.8 

29.4 . 


1.5 

.2 


\J Less than 0,05 percent. 

2J Not available from study. Percent shown for December 1942; source, 
Food Distribution Administration, Civilian Food Requirements Branch. 


Medical Care 

Some States included medical care among the budgeted requirements 
in computing the amount of the regular monthly payment when inclusion of 
this requirement did not bring the total amount above the State*s maximum 
payment. Because of maximums, however, 6 States could provide very little 
medical care through the monthly assistance payment. In the other 2 States, 
Massachusetts and Vdsconsin, ADC payments included the cost of emergency 
medical services for about 12 percent and 3 percent of the families, respec¬ 
tively. About 10 percent of all the families received medical services 
provided through general assistance or services in public hospitals or 
clinics financed from public funds. The proportion of families receiving 
such services ranged from about 2 percent in Arkansas to about 29 percent 
in the District of Columbia (table 11). Medical services were provided 
some families by voluntary health or welfare agencies. Only in the District 
of Columbia did a substantial proportion of the families receive medical 
services from this source. 


N 
























/ 


- 27 


Table 11.—Percent of families on ADC rolls with medical care financed 
from specified source, for 8 States, October 1942 


State 

ADC 

payments 

Other 

public 

funds 

Voluntary 

agencies 

Total, 8 States. 

2.2 

10.2 

1.8 

Arkansas. 

—— 

2.1 

•4 

District of Columbia. 

— 

28.6 

15.0 

Massachusetts. 

12.0 

u.o 

.6 

Missouri. 

— 

12.7 

2.6 

Montana... 

— 

22.6 

4.3 

North Carolina. 

— 

2.6 

1.7 

Oklahoma. 

— 

5.4 

1.8 

Wisconsin. 

2.8 

18.6 

1.0 


: The percent of families receiving medical care financed through 
the specified sources is probably smaller than the sum of the 
percents for each source, since a family may receive care through 
more than one source. 


Note 


















VI. 


NONMOWETARY INCOME FROM SOURCES OTHER THAN PUBLIC AID 


About two-fifths of the families had nonmonetary income from pri¬ 
vate sources (table 12). Living quarters and food comprised the b\ilk of 
such income. About one-fourth of the families had shelter, owned, pro¬ 
vided by relatives, or obtained in exchange for services. Some food other 
than surplus food of the Food Distribution Administration was available 
without purchase to a fourth of the families. More than 7 percent of the 
families received clothing, fuel, or other income in kind. 


Table 12.—Percent of families on ADC rolls with specified type of non¬ 
monetary income from sources other than public aid, 
for 8 States, October 1942 


State 

Housing 

Food 

Other 

Total 

Rent-free 

In return 
for services 

Total, 8 States.. 

25.4 

20.1 

5.3 

25.8 

7.4 

Arkansas..... 

85.0 

77.6 

7.4 

67.8 

2.2 

District of Columbia.. 

1.4 

1.0 

.4 

1.7 

.3 

Massachusetts. 

1.9 

1.3 

.6 

.4 

1.5 

Missouri..... 

13.7 

7.2 

6.5 

50.0 

18.6 

Montana.. 

37.1 

33.9 

3.2 

20.8 

7.8 

North Carolina. 

36.3 

25.0 

11.3 

35.2 

10.5 

Oklahoma. 

17.9 

12.1 

5.8 

7.1 

4.6 

Wisconsin...... 

33.8 

31.9 

1.9 

23.5 

4.3 


Comparable estimates of the current income value of such resoxurces 
as the ownership of a home, shelter provided by relatives, and farm and 
garden produce consumed could not be obtained from the many scattered 
workers who participated in the study. The only appraisals of such income 
were estimates by the case workers as to whether such income was wor-Dh 
less than or v/as valued at $5 or more. 

For soDiewhat more than 1 family in 4 in the 8 States, the nonmonetary 
income reported had a value of at least $5. The percent of families in 
each State with nonmonetary income from sources other than public aid valued 
at $5 or more was as follows: 


18/ Private agencies may have been the source of nonmonetary income in 
some families, but judging by the small amount of cash income from 
this source it can be assumed that the amount of nonmonetary income 
from private agencies was negligible. 




















- 29 - 


Percent 

State of families 


Total, 8 States.... 27.7 


Arkansas. 52.5 

District of Columbia.... 2.5 

• Massachusetts.. 3.1 

Missouri. 35.7 

Montana. 47.4 

North Carolina. -43.1 

Oklahoma. 13.0 

Wisconsin. 37.5 


The very small proportions shown for the District of Columbia and 
Massachusetts, the most urbanized States studied, suggest that such in¬ 
come is more prevalent in rural States. 













y 


VII. SUMMARY 


In a period when employment was expanding and jobs were open to 
persons not normally in the labor market, families receiving aid to 
dependent children in 8 States had an average total cash income for a 
month of less than $63 for an average family of 4.5.persons, including 
the childrep for whom aid was planned and others living as a family in 
the same household. A little more than half of this ^ount came from 
the ADC payment, the most important single source of income. About 11 
percent of the families had no appreciable income other than this assist¬ 
ance payment. About 3 percent of the total family Income c^e from o^er 
public aid and about 46 percent from all other sources combined, chiefly 
earnings. Three-fifths of all families had some income from earnings. 

In all States except Arkansas and the District of Columbia, a few 
families received general assistance in the form of commodities or orders 
on vendors. More than half of the families shared in the Food Stamp Plan 
or direct distribution of surplus agriciatural products. Other studies 
have shovm that the value of this aid was fairly substantial. 

The importance of different types of income and the proportion of 
total income from public aid and from other sources varied greatly from 
State to State. This variation is an inevitable consequence not only of 
differences in State policies and practices but also of differences in 
family composition, degree of urbanization, and labor market conditions. 

Wartime economic conditions are reflected in the importance of 
earnings as a source of income for these families with dependent children. 
The proportion of families reporting income from earnings ranged from a 
little less than one-third in Massachusetts to nearly three-fourths in 
Arkansas and North Carolina. These last two States also had the largest 
proportion of working mothers. The war has had the effect not only of 
increasing employment but also of raising living costs. Assistance pay¬ 
ments, insufficient to meet need in many States because of maximums on 
payments, low standards of assistance, or inadequate appropriations, have 
been, in some instances, less adequate as living costs have mounted. The 
combination of inadequate assistance and rising living costs undoubtedly 
has forced many mothers to seek employment even when they were needed in 
the home to care for their children. In such households, earnings were 
probably received at the expense of the care and supervision of the 
children. 

The opportunities offered by a tight labor market for employment 
of persons not normally employed may not continue indefinitely. If the 
current demand for labor slackens, unemployment will undoubtedly result 
for many families with members of low employability. At that time the 
importance of earnings as a source of income for these families will 
decline, and more families than at present will probably be entirely de¬ 
pendent for their livelihood on the assistance payment. 


- 30 - 


U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : 1945 O - *51052 





The Nature of Service 

in 

Public Assistance Administration 


PUBLIC ASSISTANCE REPORT No. 10 


FEDERAL SECURITY AGENCY 

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION 
Bureau of Public Assistance 




FEDERAL SECURITY AGENCY 

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMEVISTRATION 

Arthur J. Altmeyer, Commissioner 


William L. Mitchell, Deputy Commissioner 


BLUEAU OF PUBUC ASSISTANCE 

Jane M. Hoey, Director 





The Nature of Service 


in 


ublic Assistance Administration 




. By GRACE F. MARCUS 

Special Consultant, Bureau of Public Assistance 


FEDERAL SECURITY AGENCY 

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION 
Bureau of Public Assistance 


PUBLIC ASSISTANCE REPORT No. 10 


iiiited States Government Printingr 0£Sce 


Washinjrton: 1946 


For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing OflBce 
Washington 25, D. C. - Price 10 cents 






fy.. 


f 


0 



. ^ . 

t * I 






I 







I 

♦ 

i 


f 


V 










CONTENTS 


Page 

Foreword . HI 

Introduction 

i The purpose of the statement . VII 

j Order of presentation . VII 

Limitation of presentation . VII 

! I, Purposes of Public Assistance as a Program of 
i Social Security 

I Effect on the agency’s operation of its idea of its underlying 
1 purposes . 1 

j Purpose of social security and its implications for agency 
i operations . 2 

I Statutory basis for the right to assistance . . 3 

j Implications of the right to assistance for eligibility 
i determination . 3 

! How the right to assistance affects the relationship 
I between agency and individual . 4 

i Fairness and dependability in the administration of assistance . 5 

^ Summary . 6 

in. Service in Public Assistance Administration 

Eligibility determination as the base for public 
] assistance service . 8 

The individual’s problem in establishing eligibility . 9 

i Explaining eligibility requirements 11 

Value to the individual in understanding eligibility 

j requirements . 12 

I Explaining policy and procedure in eligibility determination 13 

I Discussing choices under agency policy and procedure 13 

I Understanding the meaning of dependency in dealing with 

j the applicant . 14 

I Providing opportunity for the applicant to take responsibility 15 

j Respecting the individual as a factor in eligibility 
I determination . 


I 


V 




























CONTENTS 


Page 

Concern for the individual in his relationships . 17 

Range of individual needs . 19 

Responsibility for identifying special needs . 20 

Defining the conditions and obligations of continuing 

eligibility . 22 

Service in referral to other programs or agencies . 25 

Service in situations involving problems of behavior 

and personal relationships . 26 

Defining the agency’s responsibility in problems 

of personal relationships .28 

Conclusion . 31 


VI 













Iiitrofliiction 


purpose of the Statement 

This statement is offered for use in developing the elements in admin- 
I stration of public assistance that will promote the welfare of people in 
leed and the public interest in having need met. The statement is 
, ;ntended to assist in making and interpreting policy for the guidance 
)f ^v'orkers and in directing staff development. Its purpose is to suggest 
' vays in which the objectives of public assistance may be more effectively 
•ealized in a service rendered to individuals. 

* Jrder of Presehtation 

1 This analysis of service in public assistance is based on the belief 
^Ihat an agency is responsible for offering service that meets the essential 
[; requirements of the task that the agency is set up to perform. - 
I In public assistance, the primary task of the agency is to provide 
issistance. This is the practical reason why the public furnishes the 
[agency with assistance funds and why people in need apply to the 
jigency. To determine how it must operate to provide assistance properly, 
Jhe agency must clearly realize the social purposes it is expected to advance, 
rhe agency and its workers should be able to distinguish these purposes 
Torn other purposes inconsistent or unconnected with them. The agency 
nust also appraise the various means it employs to make sure that they 
are suitable to its purposes and are used in a way that brings about 
Jie intended result: a helpful service to the people who seek its assistance. 

For these reasons, this statement, in defining service, examines the 
imderlying purposes of the Social Security Act in providing grants-in-aid 
for public assistance and analyzes the responsibility that consequently 
jEalls upon the agency and its workers in doing the job that is faithful 
these purposes. 

! Underlying the statement is the belief that the agency and its workers 
mrill find it easier to perform the task of administering assistance to 
individuals if they are agreed on the purposes for which they are working 
ind if they can test what they do by its effect in achieving these purposes. 

Limitation of Presentation 

The emphasis in this statement has been placed on common minimum 
JSsentials of service in public assistance administration. It is to be expected 
Slat as the administration of assistance becomes firmly grounded in agree- 
aaent on the demands of the job, and as skill develops in satisfying these 
flemands. the social usefulness of public assistance as a service to 


vn 






■J 

■i' 


individuals will be extended and deepened. Agencies will naturally de-j 
velop effectivness in service at the pace and to the degree permitteBj 
by their special conditions and opportunities. Differences in the qualitt 
of service will result while workers are in the process of learning ti 
orient themselves to this kind of administration of assistance. An elemenJ 
tary definition should therefore provide agencies with a means for aw 
praising the soundness of their service, that is, the extent to whici 
the ser^'ice is geared to carrying out the basic job of providing publilj 
assistance. 


■1 



I 

I 

: p 

I 

' a 

a 

t 

■ f 

! ^ 
1 a 


VIII 






a 


Purposes of Public Assistance as 
Program of Social Security 

Effect on the Agency^s Operation of Its 
Idea of Its Underlying Purposes 
The agency^ administering assistance is continually faced with ques¬ 
tions which it will answer in accordance with its conception of its social 
purposes. Because individual ideas of the ends to be ser\'ed in providing 
issistance will vary wddely both inside and outside the agency, it needs 
to w'ork through the variations of opinion and attitude within its own 
Staff to secure a social consistency in the formulation, and then in the 
Individual interpretation and application, of its policies. 

\^Tien the agency and its staff have arrived at decisions about funda¬ 
mental purposes, the task of maintaining and strengthening them begins, 
rhe desired objectives may be difficult to achieve. The conditions hamper¬ 
ing full achievement are often external. They may include legal restric¬ 
tions, inadequacy of funds, and lacks or defects in other local w'elfare 
services. There may be internal problems in the agency’s structure, ad¬ 
ministrative operation, and stage of staff development. In any case, the 
igency and its workers must frequently take into account handicapping 
factors and w'ork out practical adjustments to them. 

Tlie agency’s current situation may force certain compromises in 
policy that restrict or partly obscure the underlying social purpose. Because 
the social purpose does not find full and unmistakable expression in 
practical policy, the agency is under the more urgent need to create 
and preserve an understanding of fundamental objectives. There are 
;8everal reasons why the agency must cultivate this understanding: (1) to 
obtain the maximum realization of the positive possibilities within the 
'Recognized restrictions in its current policies; (2) to assure unity in 
administrative direction and consistency in W'ork with clients; (3) to 
give direction to changes in external and internal conditions that affect 
practice adversely; and (4) to improve policies that affect the worker’s 
Opacity for satisfactory performance in assisting people in need. 

■ 1 Since few public welfare agencies administer public assistance alone and can therefore properly 
fie called public assistance agencies, for the sake of brevity the term agency administering assistance, 
or simply agency, is used in this statement. Public welfare agencies carrying a number of functions 
may divide them differently under departmental administrations or combine them under one administra¬ 
tion. These differences may result, in turn, in different combinations of responsibility for workers. 
This discussion will not attempt to go intb the organization and coordination of different services, 
)kor will it deal in detail with the basis on which a worker carrying an integrated case load may 
render both public assistance and other functional services to the client at the same time. For a 
brief general discussion of this subject, see, however, pp. 28—31. 

696972—46—2 


1 





2 


Purpose of Social Security and Its 

' Implications for Agency Operations 

The public stake in protecting the economic security of individual; 
extends beyond ensuring their physical survival. Well-being in a demo< 
cratic society must include the individual’s maintenance of his capacity 
for independent functioning. General security requires that individual 
be shielded against hazards that may undermine this capacity or thwarl 
its development. Good public policy demands that opportunity for indi¬ 
viduals to carry their personal responsibilities be the more carefully safe 
guarded because these personal responsibilities are of such a nature thal 
no external organization, public or voluntary, can undertake them will 
equivalent adequacy and economy. 

Under the Social Security Act, the purpose of public assistance is tc 
supply the necessary minimum of economic security to persons in specified 
groups of the population who lack resources of their own to meet then 
essential needs. Since the well-being of the community depends on th( 
well-being of its individual members, the agency, in furnishing assistance 
to people unable to support themselves, is serving at one and the same 
time the welfare of these individuals and the welfare of the genera! 
public of which they are a part. 

This concept of social security has practical usefulness for the agency 
It provides a positive and stable position from which to deal with contra 
dictory ideas about the purpose that should determine the agency’s cours< 
in a given situation. This definition of social security disposes of th( 
conflict often assumed to exist between the essential welfare of the genera l 
group and the essential welfare of particular members. If the basic interests 
of the community and the basic interests of the individual are properl) 
defined, they are not at odds, and the agency can have an inner assurancs 
that in serving the good of the individual it is also serving the good o: 
society. 

The purpose of social security gives the agency an active, constructs 
function in providing assistance: to employ every available resource o; 
its own and to furnish access to every available resource in the com i 
munity needed and desired by the individual to maintain and improvi i 
his independent command of his situation. This aim requires that th( : 
agency make assistance available to all who can be proved eligible and i 
in addition, make this assistance as sufficient to their need as is possibh 
within the agency’s legal sanctions and financial ability. The agency’i ' 
objective includes preservation of the values that accrue to society fron 
the individual’s attaining and conserving his maximum capacity' anc 
opportunity for self-direction. Effectiveness of administration can there j 
fore be measured by the degree to which it allows the individual t< , 





3 


move under his own power and to manage his own personal and social 
relationships. 

Statutory Basis for the Right to Assistance 

Associated with the objectives of social security and reinforcing them 
are two major operating purposes: (1) to administer assistance as a 
right, and (2) to achieve social fairness and dependability in the dis¬ 
tribution of funds to individuals. Three provisions of the Social Security 
Act furnish a definite statutory basis for administering assistance as a 
right. 

The requirement that the individual have an opportunity for a fair 
hearing establishes his claim on the agency for a review of its proceed¬ 
ings when he is dissatisfied with its decisions. This right to appeal 
enables the individual to challenge the factual basis on which the agency 
has operated in his case and the validity of its judgments. Eligibility 
requirements thus acquire a distinct and tangible value for the individual 
by providing the ground on which he can hold the agency responsible 
under the law and regulation for the action it has taken on his appli¬ 
cation or in determining his payment. 

The provision restricting the agency’s use of information about the 
individual to the purpose of serving him establishes another aspect of 
his right. His affairs may not become public property, nor his personal 
status or his welfare be damaged by disclosures about them. His business 
with the agency remains his private business, and the agency is obligated 
to respect it as such. 

The provision for payment of assistance in money recognizes that once 
the agency has determined his eligibility and the amount of his payment, 
the money belongs to the individual. He is free to decide for himself, 
on his own responsibility, how he will spend it, and having spent it, 
he is free of any obligation to account for his use of it. 

The provision of the act requiring the establishment of methods for 
proper and efficient operation has played an indirect part in strengthening 
and extending the meaning of the right implicit in the three provisions 
mentioned above. Efficiency in administration naturally demands con¬ 
sistency throughout administration and therefore makes all of administra¬ 
tion responsible for respecting and safeguarding the right to assistance 
in its various implications. 

Implications of the Right to Assistance 
for Eligibility Determination 

^ The right to assistance implied in the provisions for fair hearing, 
‘protection of confidential information, and the money payment gives 
support to basic elements in social security. The fair hearing safeguards 



4 


the material claim of those who are eligible for assistance and, in addition, 
their claim to the full amount of assistance due them under the agency’s 
defined policies. The other provisions safeguard the social claim of 
people in need to protection of their private status and to personal free¬ 
dom in spending their money. The right to assistance is, however, con¬ 
ditional on meeting eligibility requirements. It therefore depends on 
the way in which eligibility is determined. 

To meet its responsibility for administering assistance as a right, the 
agency must bring eligibility determination under objective controls, 
defining the conditions binding on the individual in obtaining assistance 
and on itself in disbursing assistance. In defining these conditions, the 
agency is fixing and limiting the nature and scope of its legitimate 
concern in what the individual does in his individual situation. In stating 
definitely the obligations which the individual must meet to obtain assist¬ 
ance, the agency is also restricting the demands which it can properly 
make on him as a recipient. Thus the right to assistance rests on two 
related and essential conditions, the availability of assistance to eligible 
persons and the definition of the mutual obligations of the agency and 
the individuals, it serves. 

How the Right to Assistance Affects the Relationship 
Between Agency and Individual 

The relationship between the agency and the individual that is dictated 
by the principle of assistance as a right also predicates a series of beliefs 
about people in need. People in need vary from one another as other 
people vary. Individuals in need, like most others in the population, 
usually have a capacity to understand and respect the purposes animating 
their Government in relation to them and have a similar ability to deal 
responsibly with that Government. Like the majority of people, individuals 
in need generally prefer to support themselves unaided and therefore 
will use any opportunity to lessen or end their dependence on public 
assistance. Like other people, they ordinarily have both the wish and 
the capacity to direct their own affairs and manage their personal re¬ 
sponsibilities, and they do not differ from other human beings in an 
active and independent concern to improve their living situations and 
to master problems that interfere with their effective personal functioning. 
In short, the condition of financial need and dependence does not mark 
a difference in the kind or quality of people whom it overtakes. 

Implicit in the views stated above is the belief that people in need 
possess the same range of differences as the financially independent and 
have a similar right to these differences. Those with whom the agencv 
is concerned, however, have certain common characteristics: their need 
and request for help and other factors that make them eligible for assist- 




5 


ance. The agency’s requirements are consequently designed to identify 
them as eligible, and the specific obligations it defines for them will be 
strictly related to its own need to make sure that it is providing assist¬ 
ance only to eligible persons. The agency establishes its relationship with 
individuals on a basis that enables them to know what they can expect 
from it and what it expects from them, and it endeavors to supply assist¬ 
ance adequate to their need. These proceedings have a special virtue in 
releasing and stimulating the motives that usually animate people to 
assume responsibility for their own lives. 

The agency’s course is directed by its responsibility to see that the 
right to assistance acquires meaning and value to each individual. To 
make such a relationship possible and socially effective, the individual’s 
use of any service of the agency must be voluntary, shaped by his own 
conscious choice and by his independent decision to bring about some 
modification in his situation. The agency’s service in administering assist¬ 
ance should be directed toward enabling the individual to find and act 
on his own incentives, to better his condition, and to provide him with 
whatever help within its reach is necessary to achieve this end. To 
develop the values implicit in the right to assistance, the agency and its 
workers give up activities that regulate his relationships or entail super¬ 
vision of his affairs. Such activities undermine the individual’s ability 
to function self-responsibly and to assert his own intelligence and initiative 
in ordering his personal life. 

Fairness and Dependability in the 
Administration of Assistance 

The agency’s responsibility for giving reality to the right to assist¬ 
ance makes dependability a dominant objective in disbursing assistance 
efficiently. To provide assistance to different individuals in different cir¬ 
cumstances on a basis that is fair and reliable, the agency governs its 
administration by law, principle, and policy. 

Policy is the agency’s practical instrument— 

i i 1. For seeing that people in similar circumstances actually receive 
similar treatment from their government; 

1^ 2. For acquainting all individuals who deal with the agency with what 

^ it can do for them in their specific situation and under what con- 
K ditions and on what terms its assistance can be provided; 

■ 3. For placing at each worker’s command the agency’s guides for pro- 
jt ceeding surely at points of doubt or difficulty in individual situations; 

4. For furnishing each worker with knowledge indispensable to action 
ft that can be sustained by the agency; and 

K 5. For assuring that its business in each case is conducted in such a 





6 


way that the agency, as an office of government, can account for.^ 
what it has done and submit its actions to impartial scrutiny. 

Policy is used in the agency’s operation to bulwark the agency’s purpose 
in administering assistance as a right in the following ways: 

1. To enable the person in need to find out what his right to assistance is; 1 

2. To serve as a source of clear and reliable information for the 
individual; 

3. To help the worker recognize the individual’s stake in exercising 
his right by— 

a. Permitting him to know and meet responsibly the requirements ^ 
and condition on which eligibility rests, and 

b. Giving him a ground for holding the agency to its obligation if 
he questions its decisions; and 

4. To provide the agency with a necessary foundation for fulfilling 

its responsibility to the public by— ^ 

a. Explaining the basis on which need is currently met, and 

b. Indicating the value and defects of the agency’s present means 
of supplying assistance. 

Even though policy has the general value of achieving dependability 
in administering assistance, any specific policy may be socially or admin¬ 
istratively defective. Understanding of the social uses for which all policy 
is intended enables the agency’s staff to make existent policy work to the 
maximum advantage and yet to be critically aware of its deficiencies. 
Testing what it is doing against its social purposes helps to assure progres- i 
sive development of policy in the agency. Through this method, the 
agency can continue striving for whatever changes in internal or external 
conditions are necessary to improve its usefulness. 

Summary 

The underlying purposes of public assistance as a social security pro¬ 
gram prescribe for the agency what it must do if the result is to be 
a service to individuals in need: 

The individual should be enabled to meet his essential needs prompt¬ 
ly and adequately, through the money payment and through help in 
obtaining, from other sources within or outside the agency, supplemen¬ 
tary means and other services that are necessary to his physical and 
social welfare. 

People in need should have appropriate opportunity to strengthen, : 
recover, or develop their personal capacities so that they may lead | 
self-directing and self-sufficient lives within any inevitable limitations i 
of a personal or environmental nature. 






7 


The agency should develop methods of administration that permit 
its clients to maintain their personal status in a manner consistent 
with the central purposes involved in providing assistance as a right. 

I Service may include various kinds of help in meeting various types 
of needs that are related to the necessity for obtaining and living on 
assistance. The distinctive characteristics of this seryice derive from the 
right to assistance. It is necessary, therefore, to differentiate this service 
{rom other services that may be rendered in the public welfare agency 
t>r in voluntary agencies, such as those deriving from authoritative and 
protective functions. 





Service in Public Assistance i 
Administration 

^ Eligibility Determination as the Base for 
Public Assistance Service 

In administering assistance as a right, the agency has to take into 
account an essential but complicating feature: the right must be established 
by meeting certain terms defined by law and policy. Since eligibility! 
establishes the individual’s right, the processes through which eligibility! 
is determined have primary importance both for the agency and for th« 
people who request or receive assistance. The right to assistance has! 
reality only insofar as eligibility determination is conducted with accuracy,| 
fairness, and social judgment. To make that right an actuality, the agency: 
and its workers must develop full understanding of what is required ofj 
them for the proper handling of initial and continuing determination ofj 
eligibility. 

The actual claim to assistance as well as the amount of the payment 
depends on combinations of circumstance that differ from individual to 
individual. For any individual, these combinations of circumstance are 
also subject to change from time to time. Agency policy furnishes genera 
guides for workers, but workers must still carry responsibility for seeing] 
how general policies apply to the specific circumstances of specific appli-| 
cants. Determination of eligibility therefore cannot be satisfactorily perj 
formed through routine procedures. Financial and other needs cannot be 
expected to remain fixed in kind or degree. Therefore, concern witll 
eligibility cannot be limited to an isolated series of procedures and toi 
periodic reviews and recalculations. i|| 

The significance which eligibility holds for the agency does not end wit6 
these material aspects of the right to assistance. The individual’s potenti» 
or actual eligibility is the indispensable practical foundation on which thi 
relationship between him and the agency rests. His maintenance and us^ 
of his eligibility status are bound up with the changing course of hi 
circumstances, relationships, and events and with what he needs and want 
to do in managing them. Bound up in his eligibility are the vital an< 
varied considerations about which his business with the agency and thi 
agency’s business with him continue to revolve. The agency’s service o; 
granting assistance, therefore, can be enriched and deepened by the wai 
in which it determines initial and continuing eligibility and handles re 
lated requests. 


8 







9 


In determining eligibility, the agency and its workers have responsi¬ 
bility for enabling each individual to— 

1. Establish his eligibility promptly and obtain all the assistance avail¬ 
able to him in his specific circumstances; 

2. Conduct his relations with the agency under conditions that permit 
him to exercise his full right to assistance and to meet the specific 
obligations through which the right must be maintained; 

3. Have opportunity, throughout his contact with the agency, to know 
! what other resources and services for meeting his individual needs 

are available within other programs of the public welfare agency 
i and in the community, and to utilize these as his individual necessity 
and desire indicate. 

In practice, the reliable determination of initial and continuing eligibility 
calls for a process of collaboration between the agency worker and the 
individual. Through the worker the agency must supply the individual with 
information and guidance about ^vhat needs to be done. The individual, 
in his turn, must supply the worker with facts or access to facts on which 
decisions may then be based. Agency and individual are thus dependent 
on each other for practical knowledge and reliable action in their related 
jspheres of responsibility. Since the process of eligibility determination 
jrequires intelligent activity from the individual, the agency must provide 
him with an objective basis for carrying out his part in the process as 
effectively as possible. To give him the help that is necessary, it is 
importairt to see what his difficulties are likely to be in taking on his 
proper role in relation to the agency. 

The Individual’s Problem in Establishing Eligibility 

Certain natural disabilities may seriously hamper the applicant in estab¬ 
lishing his claim to assistance. In many instances his practical hold on 
his own affairs has been weakened by an increasing lack or sudden loss 
of essential resources, and he has a sense of helplessness and failure in 
irunning his owm affairs. He is often beset by fears that his need may 
hot be understood or accepted as legitimate. He may think that he will 
have to submit to humiliating and socially disturbing procedures or that 
|he may be forced to surrender control over his own manner of living. He 
I usually has little knowdedge of how the agency proceeds, or w^hat its 
'reasons are for its particular proceedings with him, or w'hat it can do 
for him or wdll expect from him. The agency’s necessar}' inquiries enter 
jinto various phases of his private life that involve or are involved in his 
'finances^—his household management, his relations with his immediate family 
and relatives, and his personal living arrangements. These are matters 
affecting him so intimately that without help he may not succeed in pre¬ 
senting a realistic picture of his situation. To qualify for assistance under 

696972—4e—3 



the agency’s conditions and standards or to live on the amount of assist-^ 
ance available, he may have to make various changes in his plan or scale; 
of living, and this prospect may further upset his hope of keeping any^ 
grasp on his affairs. 

In addition, problems arise for any individual in becoming dependent 
on an external agency for all or part of his subsistence. Normally, for 
the independent person, control over his financial economy is the basis 
on which he determines and meets his own needs, manages his affairs, 
and conducts his personal and social relationships. When the agency becomes 
an active factor in this financial economy, its operation affects the struc¬ 
ture on which the rest of the individual’s existence depends. Because public 
assistance can supply only an established minimum, money is bound to i 
be a more immediate factor in every part of the life of recipients than 
of persons who have a financial margin. Agency control over his means 
of subsistence may therefore disturb or overthrow the individual’s habitual 
basis for management. A correspondingly greater responsibility falls on 
the agency to forestall this turn of events and to make it possible for 
the individual to assert his powers of doing for himself, making his own 
decisions, and devising his own plans. 

The aim of the agency is to enable the individual to use its assistance 
in a plan of living that is determined by his particular circumstances and 
interests. It must therefore help him to find an accommodation to its i 
mode of operation that permits him to work with it to this end. To ; 
extend this help, the agency must realize that its organized, systematic 
proceedings are very different from those an individual would follow in 
appraising and trying to solve his own financial problems. The scope of 
the agency’s concern in the individual’s affairs and the restrictions on its 
assistance may seem to leave him with little or no room for using his 
practical judgment and initiative. To be helpful to the client in main¬ 
taining or regaining his self-control, the agency should be aware of the 
possibility that his feelings about his need for assistance and about the 
agency’s position of economic control are factors that may hamper him 
in assuming an active role in dealing with his affairs. An essential remedy 
for these difficulties lies in the w'orker’s undertaking to make the agency’s 
role intelligible to him. i 

To deal planfully with the agency, the individual must have an oppor¬ 
tunity to understand the considerations that determine its specific acts ; 
and decisions in his case, the financial reliance he can place on the I 
agency, and the requirements he must meet in order to maintain his 
relation to it. The individual needs this definite understanding so that 
he can choose and plot his course with aw'areness of the possibilities and 
responsibility for consequences. He needs it also to discover concretely 






11 


i how a way of living that will be feasible from his point of view can 
be managed within the scheme through ^v'hich the agency provides assist¬ 
ance. The service performed by the worker in providing this under¬ 
standing has a crucial value in enabling the individual to deal with the 
agency itself as a comprehensible and reliable factor in his economy, that 
is, as the instrument through which his need may be met as a matter 
of right. 

Explaining Eligibility Requirements 

The first and basic need of the individual is for a simple and practical 
explanation that makes it possible for him to understand the agency’s 
eligibility requirements as they apply to him. This explanation furnishes 
the ground on which he can enter into an active, self-reliant relationship 
with the agency. In developing explanation as an interviewing skill 
essential to its service, the agency transforms a one-sided investigation 
of the individual’s circumstances into a joint enterprise in which he is 
recognized as an indispensable direct partner. As the agency’s workers 
acquire proficiency in this distinctive skill, inquiry into the individual’s 
eligibility ceases to be an investigation conducted about and around him 
as an inert object that is without interest and responsibility. Instead, 
responsibility for establishing eligibility is shared with him to the limit 
of his capacity. In the application interview, the worker should make 
plain that in proving eligibility the individual is establishing his right 
and should also inform him from point to point what he may expect 
the agency to do as its conditions are met. 

If the individual is obviously ineligible according to his own clear state¬ 
ment, the need that has prompted him to make inquiry or request assist¬ 
ance imposes an obligation on the worker to indicate other resources 
within or outside the agency in which he may be interested, as well as 
to inform him of the circumstances that make him ineligible. Before con- 
, eluding that he is obviously ineligible, however, the worker should be 
careful to distinguish fact from unjustified assumptions, such as an assump¬ 
tion that he should be able to earn what he needs or that his relatives 
should support him. When the applicant is not needy according to the 
agency’s standards, the worker’s review of his circumstances with him 
may occasionally reveal that he could relieve or meet his particular difficulty 
i by using other resources or services in the community for which he may 
be eligible. 

If the individual is potentially eligible, the worker is responsible for 
explaining each factor affecting his eligibility, the facts necessary to 
establish it, and the means by which he may most readily obtain proof. 
; It is important to recognize that applicants vary in their ability to follow 
detailed discussion. The worker who is concerned with making the 



12 


individual’s right accessible to him will be sensitive to difficulties. For 
example an individual may be unable to give attention because he has 
delayed application until his need has become critical and he is deeply, 
distressed. If the worker is able to identify this anxiety, discussion of J 
emergency assistance or referral to a community resource for temporary | 
aid may relieve the applicant so that he can put his mind on the I 
application process. Another person’s difficulty in producing information ^ 
may be indecision and reluctance in pursuing his application, and he i 
may want time to reconsider his situation. Another person may not , 

volunteer information because he thinks that he can have little part : 

to play in the agency’s inquiry into his circumstances. In interviewing 'i 
him, the worker will make clear that the agency customarily obtains 1 
necessary facts from or through applicants and will make sure to consult 
him on all points in which there may be questions of choice. The applicant ^ 
should have an opportunity to know whether the facts so far given or • 
obtained are meeting the agency’s requirements and whether the meaning .j 
they have for the agency agrees with his understanding of his situation. | 
If he is found to be eligible but believes that the amount of his pay-1 

ment is less than he needs or is entitled to, he should have an opportunity | 

for further explanation of the basis of the payment. He should also be i 
informed of any resources or services in the community that might enable i 
him to supplement the money payment and meet needs for which he | 
wants attention. If he wishes to appeal any action of the agency, he I 
should be aided in doing so. 

Value to the Individual in ^ 

Understanding Eligibility Requirements ) 

Development of skill in interviewing applicants is essential. If harsh 
eligibility lequirements and low standards are part of the reality that 
the applicant confronts in seeking assistance, it is the more important f" 
that the agency’s workers give him a foothold for coping with these } 
difficulties as effectively as possible. Even when the agency’s circum- 
stances are favorable and the conditions to be met in establishing eligibility ^ 
are fair, it is essential that he know what conditions apply specifically 
to him, why the agency is obliged or chooses to lay down these conditions, 
and what it can do for him if and when he meets the conditions. 

From the information he gains about the agency’s eligibility require¬ 
ments as the workers tells him of the concrete steps required of him, the 
applicant may begin to understand that once he accomplishes what is 
necessary he acquires a definite position in relation to the agency that, 
is built on his eligibility. He sees that he can hold the agency responsible 
for what it does under its rules and standards just as it can hold him 
to his obligations. He knows what he is expected to do and that what 








13 


is expected of him is expected of all others in the same general circum¬ 
stances. He can deal with the worker in a businesslike way not unlike 
the ways familiar to him in other transactions in which, to get what 
he wants, he expects to meet terms. When he knows that the worker 
is bound by official requirements and policies, he realizes that he does 
not have to rely on the voluntary good will and judgment of another 
individual for the essentials of life and that he has not become subject 
to a person who has uncontrolled power to give or deny him assistance. 

Explaining Policy and Procedure in Eligibility Determination 

The worker may discover from the applicant’s questions or suspect 
from his behavior that he does not understand or accept the agency’s 
policies and procedures for establishing eligibility and for determining 
the amount of the assistance payment. If so, it may be necessary to 
explain further exactly how a particular factor affects the individual’s 
eligibility or the amount of his payment, or to make clear why the agency 
requires the particular information from persons in his circumstances. 
The individual may feel that the condition in question is unnecessary 
in his case, but even when he does, the opportunity to understand the 
general purpose of the condition frequently results in his accepting it 
as protection of a public interest in which he, as a member of the com¬ 
munity, also shares. Occasionally an applicant will object to some step 
in the process that is unavoidable in his particular case. For example, 
the agency may require that relatives be sought out and asked to support 
him, and he may decide to interrupt his application until he can decide 
Avhether he will agree to this requirement. In such instances, it is im¬ 
portant that the worker be able to identify his reservation and to respect 
his feeling about it, so that he may discover that the agency recognizes 
his full right to decide for himself whether he can accept the rules under 
which the agency must operate. 

Discussing Choices Under Agency Policy and Procedure 

Since the intent of the agency is to enable the applicant to pursue his 
own plan of living, the worker should inform the applicant of any latitudes 
or alternatives under agency policy or procedure that may bear on his 
choice of a course of action. For example, the old-age recipient who 
needs physical care may not know that the agency provides assistance 
for sheltered care; the applicant for aid to dependent children may not 
know tliat an older child who has been brought up by his grandmother 
may be eligible for aid in the grandmother’s home. 

The applicant should also have as much voice as possible in determining 
how procedures are to be carried out, especially when his family relation¬ 
ships or his status with other persons ip the community are at stake 




14 


or his privacy is involved. If the applicant’s stake is to be properly con¬ 
sidered, the worker must be able to define for him the specific facts 
needed from outside sources. Knowing what these are, he has less reason j 
to fear that personal opinions are being sought from his intimates or 
acquaintances or that his private life is being investigated. In addition, 
when he learns the purpose of such procedures, he may be able to make 
suggestions that save effort or time, or to devise feasible ways for ac¬ 
complishing the necessary objective and protecting his legitimate personal ; 
interests. In accordance with the agency’s concern to take the individual 
into account as an active collaborator, the worker will give the applicant 
an opportunity to consider such questions as how an absent father or 
other legally responsible relatives may best be approached or how informa¬ 
tion on earnings should be obtained. Among the alternatives that may 
require such attention is that of the spouse’s giving directly certain kinds 
of information or having a part in deciding some question that arises in 
the interview. This issue is usually more than an issue of procedure 
and may entail regard for the usual roles of different members of the 
family. In aid to dependent children cases, for example, there may be 
need to provide opportunities for both the mother and the father to 
participate in decisions. 

Understanding the Meaning of Dependency in 
Dealing With the Applicant 

For the average person, financial independence constitutes an essen¬ 
tial title to self-esteem and the respect of others. This independence estab- I 
lishes his individual adequacy in the realm of work, in his family role, 
in his neighborhood, and in his relations with relatives and friends. 
His capacity to provide for himself has given him freedom to pursue his : 
preferences, to select the duties he will emphasize and those he will minimize, 
to give importance to certain needs and problems, and to endure or ignore 
others. In brief, economic self-suflSciency, however marginal or uncertain, 
is for most individuals a necessary sanction for independent judgment 
and action. They count on their capacity to meet their own needs as a 
protection against outside interference with their private living. 

If an individual is to be free to act in his own behalf, he must be 
assured that the worker accepts him as a person with the ability and 
the right to think for himself. To grasp the part such assurance must 
play in helping the individual to regain an independent footing, the 
worker must understand the position into which he has been forced by; 
his need of assistance, and the power over him that this seems to him 
to give the representative of the agency on which he must now depend. 
However self-respecting he has been, his need to apply for assistance 
marks a loss of status because of the value commonly placed on economic' 


..t 

ii 







15 


self-sufficiency. On the other hand, the individual’s own sense of the mean¬ 
ing of financial independence, if that meaning is not dulled by inadequate 
’ assistance and disturbing experiences with the agency, may be counted 
; on to motivate him to recover insofar as he can the capacity to satisfy 
his own wants. Assistance itself, however liberal, is no substitute for the 
personal advantages of having one’s owm resources. Therefore, if assist- 
' ance is to serve its social purposes, workers must take responsibility for 
! recognizing in their dealings with individuals the capacities for action 
and judgment that are shaken by the loss of independence. It is only 
as people in need discover, through their experience with the agency, that 
they can still think and act for themselves, that they retain full incentive 
to master their situations, in whatever ways and to whatever degree their 
specific circumstances of age, health, and abilities permit. 

Providing Opportunity for the Applicant To Take Responsibility 

In administering assistance as a right, it becomes a matter of prime 
importance that the worker does not take from the individual his re¬ 
sponsibility for conducting his part in his business with the agency. The 
worker’s task is to make it clear in w'ords and behavior that the agency 
recognizes that the applicant’s affairs remain his own and that responsi¬ 
bility for decisions about them is ultimately his. The worker may show 
steady interest in and respect for the applicant’s capacity to do for him¬ 
self without discounting the need the particular individual may have 
for help in obtaining certain facts or documentary evidence. Judgment 
is required of the worker in estimating the physical and mental capacity 
of the individual to do some of the necessary things effectively and promptly, 
i The worker needs to determine with the individual what responsibility 
he can take for obtaining proof or investigating potential resources or 
j settling questions that may affect his arrangement and the agency’s assist- 
i ance. Planning the tasks to be performed and allocating responsibility 
■ for them serve a positive purpose. The applicant has a chance to take 
practical hold of his role in the process and to choose what he will do 
rfor himself and Avhat help he will accept from the agency. Moreover, 
Phis sense of responsibility is strengthened by a proceeding that accepts 
I him as a trustworthy and self-sufficient person. 

Respecting the Individual as a Factor in 
\ Eligibility Determination 

f Respect for individuals is founded on the worker’s capacity to accept 
I individual differences and to control prejudiced reactions to them. The 
[ differences may be those of national origin, color, religious belief, or 
' economic background, or they may be more individual in nature. Respect 
I for the applicant requires that his peculiar feelings, ideas, standards, be- 





16 


havior, and relationships be accepted as natural and reasonable for him. 
This disciplined attitude is necessary if the worker is to recognize each 
individual’s particular capacities and his right to protect his personal 
status and integrity from injury. Thus what the applicant feels or thinks 
is not open to criticism or in need of justification. 

The accurate and fair performance of eligibility determination often 
hinges on the worker’s development of a capacity to respect the individual j 
in his differences. The worker’s attitudes may directly affect the reliability 1 
of the facts on which decisions are based, the understanding the individual J 
gains of the agency, or the recognition of a problem with which he ^ 
needs practical help. The worker’s expression of her real respect for , 
the applicant as a person will be an important factor in his recognition j 
of his right to express his own feelings or to ask that they be given , 
whatever consideration is possible under the agency’s policies. i 

The worker’s ability to maintain a discipline over personal reactions ! 
and prejudices is frequently put to the test. The applicant may belong || 
to a community group that live in severe poverty. If the worker therefore | 
concludes that his standards are inherently low and that he would not j 
use assistance to raise his level of living, she will tend automatically to 
exclude certain aspects of need from the inquiry. Another applicant may ) 
demand unusual concessions to personal tastes and preferences. If the j 
worker thinks such behavior unsuitable in one who is dependent, the ! 
result may be a failure to see what provision the agency may properly ■ 
make for what is special in the applicant’s need. If the worker is antagonized | 
by a mother’s complaint that she is tired of struggling for her children, * 
she may fail to explain the various arrangements under which aid to ■ i 
dependent children might be provided. An old-age applicant may greet i 
the mention of each step in the process with immediate protest. If the 
Avorker does not overcome annoyance at this belligerence, interpretation 
of agency requirements and policies will go by the board. i 

On the other hand, when workers respect the feelings of individuals, 
the service they render may include help in meeting the difficulty that • 
sometimes arises out of the conflict between those feelings and the policies j 
of the agency. The following case is an example of service in the ad¬ 
ministration of public assistance: j 

A disturbed young woman applied for aid to dependent children, j 
She had secretly had an illegitimate child 2 years before and had left j 
her mother to take responsibility for him from the time of his birth. 1 
Now her mother was dead, and her sister would send the child to her ! 
unless she found some place to put him. She wanted the agency to ,! 
board the child somewhere and relieve her of the danger that others | 
would discover the irregularity in her past. The worker explained ■ 
to her the purposes for which aid to dependent children is intended and : 
told her briefly what the agency’s requirements were. 


I 








17 


The applicant became extremely upset. She could not permit any 
inquiry, nor could she afford to spend any of her money on the child. 
She had to protect her position in this community that had become 
home to her. No one knew that she had a baby except the doctor and 
several members of her family. Whatever happened, no one was going 
to know. 

When the young woman became calmer, the worker told her that 
it was difficult to see what could be done under these conditions, but 
discussed with her the possibility of applying to a child-placement agency. 
The applicant was momentarily interested in this suggestion but re¬ 
jected it because sbe could not risk any further disclosure. The child 
was a stranger to her; though she knew that she owed him something, 
she could not allow her future to be ruined. 

The worker remarked that the applicant had taken a risk in coming 
to this agency when she might have thought of some other way of 
disposing of the child. At this point the applicant wept bitterly. Even 
though she wanted to get rid of the .child, she could not quite bring 
herself to abandon him: after all, he was her child and it was not 
his fault that he was born. 

When her tears subsided, the worker said that the applicant’s problem 
was to find out what she could do with the child without too much 
cost to him or herself. After a pause, the applicant asked the worker 
to repeat all that she had previously told about foster-home placement 
and adoption. When she had thought over what might reasonably be 
required of her by the child-placement agency, she remarked that she 
would have to face it; probably her fears were exaggerated; this talk 
with the worker made her realize that she did not want to throw 
the baby away, and she would go to the placement agency and see 
whether he could be considered for adoption. 

In this situation, help was founded on the worker’s ability to control 
personal reactions to the young woman’s behavior and, after identifying 
I the applicant’s conflicting purposes, to furnish her with a practical basis 
pfor deciding what she would do. 

\Concern for the Individual in His Relationships 

W- The agency and its workers must see that applicants are not handi¬ 
capped in making decisions and choices that they need to recognize as 
■ their own if they are to remain accountable for the conduct of their 
affairs. Because the conditions under which assistance is given may affect 
the individual’s relationships and those relationships may play a part in 
'increasing or decreasing the need to be met by assistance, the agency 
carries a heavy responsibility for its influence on this phase of his welfare. 

The agency is confronted with the problem of determining how, under 
requirements and restrictions that affect personal and family relationships, 
its proceedings with individuals may be so conducted as to give them all 
possible choices. It is not within the province of the agency or its workers 
to determine whether a mother should keep or place her child, an absent 


4 



18 


father return to his family, an old-age applicant live with or apart from 
a spouse, a widow marry a man who is unable and unwilling to support 
her children. The agency’s responsibility is for its requirements, policies, 
and standards as they relate to the objective conditions under which 
assistance may be obtained. 

In situations like those above, the agency should enable its workers ^ 
to make clear to individuals how its policies bear on their specific 
problems and affect the choices open to them. In all proceedings involving 1 
personal and family relationships, the crucial element to be safeguarded 
by the agency is the individual’s responsibility for decision wherever J 
actual room for decision exists. In short, the decision must be made by '! 
the individual and not by the agency worker. In such situations, the ‘ 
obligation of the agency is to define where the agency will stand on points 
that the individual should take into account in weighing alternatives. If 
the agency provides the means to its workers, they may use explanation 
of conditions and policies to give the individual an opportunity to compare : 
advantages and disadvantages in different plans and to balance personal ‘i 
desires against practical consequences. | 

An applicant for aid to dependent children was taken into her par- | 
ents’ household when her husband became ill. Her husband has died, j i 
and her parents are willing to help her by letting her remain with ! 
them rent-free. She would prefer, however, to relinquish this resource ; 
if any other arrangement is possible because her overindulgent parents 
do not allow her to discipline her boys and, in effect, deprive her of . 
parental control. When she learns that the agency would not expect 
her to use this resource under these conditions, her problem is to find 
out whether, under a maximum that will make part-time work necessary, 
she can make other living arrangements that will ensure supervision 
for the children. Her course is marked by practical calculations based 
on information about what the agency can do under differing circum¬ 
stances, and her eventual decision is her own. 

An applicant for old-age assistance whose health has been failing 
and who can no longer safely live alone does not wish to enter an 
institution. The daughter who might take him into her home cannot 
give him the attention he needs and also continue the part-time job 
through which she is keeping her son in high school. Information 
about the financial provision the agency could make for his personal 
care if he entered her home provides him with ground for seeing what 
rearrangement his daughter can make. 

Realism in administration requires that the agency recognize that the ' 
amount of its assistance is a basic and conditioning element in its 
service, affecting the capacity of adults to maintain their roles in the 
family and the chance of children and youth to have the care and oppor- ; 
tunities necessary at their stage of development. The willingness and 
capacity of the recipient to make full use of the agency’s service are likely 





19 


j to depend on the extent to which his financial need is met. The agency’s 
ability to meet financial need may therefore determine the kind and 
i quality of the agency’s service. 

The agency should not remain content with efforts to make up through 
other kinds of help of its own or of other services for difficulties that 
would be more effectively met or would not arise at ail if the money- 
payment were adequate. In aid to dependent children, for example, adequate 
assistance should provide for the need of parents, for it is their place 
in the life of the child that the program is designed to preserve and 
strengthen. When the mother is compelled to work for essential income, 
the care and supervision she can give the children are ordinarily limited 
and her relationships with them may be subjected to undesirable strains. 
When the money payment does not provide for the needs of the incapaci¬ 
tated father, he suffers not only the loss of his wage-earning role and 
the hardships of his illness but also the sense of burdening his family 
with his unmet needs without power to change their situation or his own. 
In such circumstances, the inadequacy of assistance permits relation¬ 
ships within the family to be distorted and prejudices the chance of the 
father to come to positive terms with his incapacity. When assistance 
is insufficient, parents are unable to give their children what they need 
for later competition with their fellows and for escape from the hazards 
of a marginal existence. When older children are forced to contribute 
a large percentage of their earnings to the family exchequer, the natural 
impulse toward emancipation may be unwholesomely checked or stimu¬ 
lated and their feelings for their family may be alienated. 

Range of Individual Needs 

Individuals who come to the agency have a wide range of needs. One 
frequent source of need is physical and mental illness or defect. Special 
needs of the aged result from the waning of their strength and capacity, 
the narrowing circle of their contemporary relatives and friends, and their 
desire to maintain their patterns of independence and self-direction despite 
itheir infirmities. In families applying for aid to dependent children, 
Iwhen a parent has died or is absent or has become incapacitated, the 
changes in parental roles and responsibilities give rise to a variety of 
'special needs. These shifts in family relationships create problems both 
for the adults and for the children, who are often deprived of a previously 
sustaining relationship and lose as well some measure of the supervision 
[and care to which they were accustomed from the other parent, 
el i In undertaking to meet special needs, the agency should again be aware 
that the practical usefulness of assistance provision will be proportionate 
to the adequacy of the money payment to meet basic needs. If recipients 
are at a loss to obtain Basic necessities, they may have to divert money 




20 




requested for special needs to pay the rent or grocery bill. Insufficiency 
of assistance for elementary needs may also make it impossible for 
the individual to profit from special services to which the agency provides 
access. Continuing instability in his financial affairs may impede him 
in organizing himself and in mobilizing the energy required to work out 
other problems in his situation. 

People requesting or receiving public assistance may need various 
kinds of medical and psychiatric care, special physical appliances and j 
jequipment, psychological examinations and diagnosis, special diets, vocation¬ 
al rehabilitation. They may require specialized services for help in child 
training and care, housekeeping techniques, behavior difficulties, educational 
problems and plans, vocational guidance and training, employment and 
recreation. Some common individual needs, such as needs for health care, j 
are specific to particular situations. Other needs are special in the sense 
that they involve use of highly specialized resources and services and may 
demand from the worker specialized knowledge of facilities and special j 
planning. If, because of the agency’s financial limitations, the worker 
cannot provide the resources or services that are needed and desired j 
by the individual, the worker is under an obligation to help him to . 
locate any available agency or source from which they may be obtained. I 
The worker is responsible for acquainting the individual with the existence 
of specialized resources and services of whose purpose and possible use¬ 
fulness to him he might not otherwise know. In addition, the worker is 
under an obligation to give the individual any help he may require in 
applying properly for them. 

Responsibility for Identifying Special Needs 

In many cases the individual feels no necessity or desire for service 
to meet special needs or, if he does, is capable of asking for what he 
wants or of getting it on his own initiative. On the other hand, the 
applicant does not always know what the agency is able to do. His 
difficulty may be of a sort unfamiliar to his experience, or he may be 
so used to it that he does not define it as a need or problem for which 
help may be obtained. The worker, therefore, bears an active responsi¬ 
bility for observing indications of special needs and for bringing them 
up for sufficient discussion to discover whether the individual is interested 
in them and wants some help in meeting them. 

Skill in identifying needs for which the individual may require special 
resources or services rests on several factors. Primary among these is 
the importance which the agency and its workers attach to the process 
of eligibility determination. In the different considerations embraced in 
eligibility, workers are dealing particularly with the vital meanings of 
need to the individual. When workers realize that the fundamentals of 




21 


the individual’s living are affected by assistance, they are bound to be 
sensitive to problems with which he may need special kinds of help. 

An old-age assistance applicant refers to dizzy spells as a reason 
for decreasing ability to support himself by odd jobs. In discussing 
his needs, he does not mention medical care. He has not been in the 
habit of consulting a doctor and, in his losing struggle to remain 
independent, he has had neither the energy nor the freedom of mind 
to consider his health. When the worker asks whether he has gone 
or wishes to go to a doctor, his response is casual and indifferent. 
He must straighten out his financial affairs before he can attend to 
anything else. The worker’s responsibility, however, is to let him 
know that the agency does take care of medical needs or that it can 
refer him to a source that does provide them, if and when he so desires. 

A father applies for aid to dependent children on the eve of going 
to a hospital for an indefinite period. He explains that he should have 

gone a year ago, and that he is still uncertain about remaining any 

' length of time. Neither he nor his wife can bear the thought of his 

‘ separation from the family. The worker realizes that it is important 

E! to discuss the possibility of the family’s visiting him at the hospital 

and the possible need for money for transportation. She also notes 
the father’s anxiety about the welfare of his wife and children. The 
,| interview' is planned to provide him with opportunity to satisfy himself 
I that in his absence both he and his wife can count on the agency 
for practical consideration of need and a reliable interest in enabling 
-• the wife to meet it, 

\^Tien w'orkers recognize their responsibility for helping the applicant 
to obtain assistance, they wdll be interested in the meaning of the applicant’s 
situation. This interest will make it possible for them to proceed freely 
in identifying possible needs and in examining with the applicant what 
he himself wants to do about them. 

, A mother who has had a serious operation can no longer support 

her two children. She applies for aid to dependent children. The w orker 
i notes that this young woman has had great pride in not depending on 
" anyone in providing for her children and that she carefully cuts down 
be every estimate she offers. When the worker visits the home, the mother 
,ti has just finished a large washing and seems exhausted by a task beyond 
i her strength. The worker comments that there has been no discussion 
j of the need for laundry or other domestic services, and explains that 
™ it is the agency’s practice to recognize the cost of such services when 
a health condition such as hers requires them. The applicant hesitates, 
I.’ and then says that if the agency does this for other people, it would 
be sensible for her to have her laundry and heavy cleaning done until 
jj she is well enough to do them herself. 

, 5 , The workers may observe evidence of severe malnutrition in children; 
ij the apparent deafness of a girl who is not doing well in school; the 
i unsuitability of a third-floor furnished room for an old-age recipient 
i w'ith cardiac disease; or the need for recreation for children of parents 



22 


whose health limits their capacity to furnish the youngsters with occupa¬ 
tion or pastimes. 

If the purposes for which assistance is intended in the individual case 
are being fulfilled, the responsibility of the worker to identify needs 
and inform the applicant of available provisions for them should be 
progressively lightened. The individual will have been enabled to deter¬ 
mine what his own needs are, to take the initiative in bringing them up, 
and to decide for himself with which of them he wishes to concern him¬ 
self. The worker cannot presume to make these decisions for him, but at 
the start she should take the initiative in letting the individual know what 
resources and services the agency can put at his disposal. 

Defining the Conditions and Obligations of 
Continuing Eligibility 

The application process should include explanation to the individual 
of the conditions to be met in maintaining continuing eligibility. This 
explanation should be made at a time and in a way that permits the 
individual to consider these conditions as definitions of the obligations 
of all recipients in circumstances similar to his, in accordance with the 
public purpose in providing assistance. Agency and individual continue 
in a partnership directed by a concern to keep assistance and other elements 
in the agency’s service accurately adjusted to the facts of need and in line 
with the agency’s policies. The agency should therefore define for its 
workers the conditions about which the individual should be informed 
and some agreement reached with him. These conditions will cover the 
various kinds of changes to be reported by the recipient because of their 
bearing on his eligibility and the amount of his payment. The agency 
will also include its general requirements, such as for periodic review, 
information about the current physical condition of the incapacitated 
individual, and the acceptance of employment if physically able. 

The more complete the information given the applicant, the more 
effective it wall be in defining for him the nature of his relationship to 
the agency. Knowing that he has both rights and obligations in con¬ 
nection with the agency enables the individual to maintain the self-respect 
that is a basic element in personal security. The agency’s definition of 
his role assures him that he will not forfeit the responsibilities and privileges 
that belong to the independent status. Instead the agency recognizes that 
as a self-directing person he has a right to know what commitments ha 
is assuming in receiving assistance, where he stands, and what moves 
he is free to make. It is then possible for him to see his new position 
in practical terms and use his own resourcefulness to improve it. 

The value to the individual of knowing his rights and. obligation!' 
as a recipient of assistance does not end with an initial determination ol 








23 


•eligibility and the receipt of a payment but continues as long as his 
need continues. Agency and recipient have to reckon with change as 
a persisting factor in their relationship. The agency’s policies and standards 
may be modified. Increase in age may render one individual in the house¬ 
hold eligible and another ineligible for public assistance. Supporting rela¬ 
tives may marry or die, or their contributions may grow larger or smaller 
for other reasons. Changes in health may affect the need for assistance. 
The recipient may wish to make different living arrangements, or he may 
have more or less capacity to earn income of his own. As he works out 
a new scheme of living he may want to improve his situation by taking 
hold of problems that previously he felt compelled to overlook, or he 
may wish to plan ways in which he might supply some of his own needs, 
or he may become interested in developing the capacities of his children. 

If the recipient is to chart his course in a continuing relationship to 
the agency, and if he is to do this with proper regard for its requirements 
and for his obligations, he needs to understand what his responsibilities 
will be under whatever contingencies are likely in his particular situation. 
Information about his continuing obligations, carefuUy given in advance, 
equips him to take consequences into account on points in which his 
seligibility is involved, or to consult the agency to find out what his 
position would be if he takes this or that step. Knowledge of the differing 
conditions under which his assistance may be increased or decreased 
allows him to plan more freely on his own initiative. To the extent that 
he has accurate understanding from the start of the matters on which 
he is responsible for reporting to the agency, and of the things he must 
do periodically to maintain his eligibility, he is helped to differentiate 
the concerns in which the agency’s interest is involved from those that 
remain within his independent discretion and choice. 

Agencies have developed various devices to acquaint the individual 
both with the general requirements and obligations he is expected to 
observe and with the changes in his specific situation about which he 
should inform the agency. For example, one agency has devised a 
form that is given to the individual in advance of detailed discussion 
[with him of the conditions that apply in his relation to the agency. The 
J^discussion is planned to take place after his initial eligibility has been 
established and the amount of the payment settled, when he will be able 
to give it his full attention. Frequently this discussion brings up ques¬ 
tions that enable the worker to clarify not only the obligations of the 
individual to the agency but the agency’s obligations to him. Careful 
discussion of the terms of continuing eligibility has the value of defining 
the scope and limits of the agency’s concern in the individual’s affairs 
and helping him to use the agency appropriately and adequately. If his 
plans are not permanently settled, clarification of the respects in which 




24 


a future decision would affect his eligibility or payment enables him to 
proceed more securely. 

When eligibility rests on the existence of a defect or incapacity, agency 
policy should define for the worker the exact nature and extent of the 
agency’s interest in medical diagnosis, possible reexaminations, and any 
further action that may be required of the individual to determine his 
continuing eligibility. Once these distinctions are made plain, the worker 
may offer the individual service in connection with some problem be¬ 
setting him. 

A father whose incapacity derives from a condition in which improve¬ 
ment has been anticipated fails to have the medical reexamination re¬ 
quired by the agency at the time originally suggested by the physician. 
The worker talks with him about his delay in submitting to reexamination 
and finds that he thinks his illness due to a progressive and incurable 
disease that has struck down several members of his family. He has 
accordingly renounced all hope as well as all effort for recovery.' The 
worker also discovers that this man, who has felt acutely his loss of 
position as the family wage earner, is the person who formerly managed 
the family affairs. He needs not only reliable information about the 
condition that precipitated his severe illness but also recognition of 
his proper role in family planning. 

An elderly woman had been receiving assistance for several years 
in behalf of two grandchildren. On several recent occasions she had 
failed to notify the agency of changes in her situation, which hitherto 
she had been punctilious in reporting. At the time of review she was 
unable to concentrate on discussion of either her resources or the 
children’s needs, although she had said at the outset that she could 
not manage and would have to have an increase in the payment. The 
worker asked whether she was finding it hard to deal with two active 
growing boys. This was actually the crux of her difficulty, and she 
really wanted to make some other plan for the boys. The worker’s 
matter-of-fact acceptance of the grandmother’s real feelings enabled the 
latter to undertake on her own responsibility to consult other near 
relatives of the children and to work out a plan resulting in an uncle’s 
applying for aid to dependent children to maintain the children in his 
home. 

A mother was having difficulty with her IS-year-oId son. His loss 
of interest in school was threatening her plan to have him continue 
his education until he w'as 18. At the worker’s suggestion, the mother 
interviewed his teacher to learn more about his abilities and the possi¬ 
bility of some change in plan. When she was informed that his 
abilities did not warrant continuation of an academic or commercial 
course, her first thought was to have him transferred to^ a trade school, 
though there was no evidence that the boy had any special aptitudes 
or interests of this sort. The worker then brought up a question that 
had previously concerned the mother, asking whether she was worried 
about the cessation of the payment. The mother admitted that the pros¬ 
pect Avorried her and that perhaps she Avas forcing the boy to stay 





25 


in school to assure herself of assistance. Having faced the real source 
of her conflict with her son, the mother, with the worker’s help, pro¬ 
ceeded to consider ways and means by Avhich, during the remaining 
year, she might increase her earning capacity. Eventually she used her 
exceptional ability in sewing to work up a promising repair and re¬ 
modeling service. 

Service in Referral to Other Programs or Agencies 

Opportunity for service through referring the individual to another pro¬ 
gram, either within the agency or under separate auspices, obviously 
depends on the extent and development of local welfare services. Making 
appropriate referrals requires certain skills, including: 

1. Accurate knowledge of community agencies, their services and intake 
policies. The worker must be careful to see that the individual under¬ 
stands that such programs will furnish resources or services only 
in accordance with the specifications they set directly and independ¬ 
ently with the individual. 

2. Self-discipline in workers, to avoid using other agencies as subsidiary 
arms of their own. Both the other agency and the individual need 
an opportunity to establish a responsible basis for the individual’s 
use of its service. 

3. Ability to distinguish between furnishing information about another 
agency and persuasions that leave the individual in doubt about his 
freedom to use or ignore a suggested resource or to discontinue 
use of it without penalties. 

The worker may properly supply assistance for special needs discovered 
by the other agency and presented by the individual or may provide 
assistance under some plan which the individual wishes to effect with the 
aid of another agency. The responsibility for determining and providing 
assistance, however, must continue to rest with the public assistance 
worker, operating under the policies governing the administration of 
assistance, exactly as the responsibility for establishing and maintaining 
the relationship to the other agency rests Avith the worker in that agency. 

When the individual has difficulty in using another resource the agency 
may occasionally be helpful to him. 

A mother who was receiving aid to dependent children asked about 
medical facilities but made no move to use them in spite of the'increasing 
pain and disability she was experiencing. When the worker commented 
on her indecision, the mother admitted to a fear that she might have 
to be hospitalized and her home broken up. The Avorker s discussion 
of the various arrangements that might be made gave her the con¬ 
fidence she needed to consult a physician, and later to proceed with 
. plans for the operation he recommended. 

\ Another mother was deeply upset by a request from the school 
that her boy have a psychological examination. Without asking for 
an explanation, she concluded that he was going insane, as his father 


■I!' 



26 


had. This had been her persistent fear and had taken the form of 
excessive supervision of the child and a nagging concern about his 
school performance. The worker raised a question about the school’s 
reasons for asking for the psychological examination and was asked 
by the mother to interview the school principal. The worker discovered 
that the boy had excellent abilities but that lately he had been making 
little use of them. When she discussed this report with the mother, 
the latter wondered what effect her own excessive concern had been 
having on the boy, and the worker agreed that this might be disturbing 
to him. The mother remarked that perhaps she was the one who needed 
psychological advice and decided that she would take herself and the 
child to a child guidance clinic. 

In the rural agency the frequent necessity for depending on resources 
not organized as social services requires that the worker play a more 
active and extended role in referring recipients. Specialized services may 
be located at a distance and may become available only through special 
arrangements made by the w^orker. Usually the agency has established 
access to voluntary resources in the community, such as physicians ^villing 
to give free services, and knows what kinds of service they are prepared 
to give recipients and how much responsibility they will be willing to 
take. The agency has organized information about the various civic organi¬ 
zations, fraternal societies, and church groups that dispense funds for 
special purposes, and usually has worked out simple procedures for 
getting in touch with designated persons to learn whether money can be 
made available and to discuss an anticipated referral. 

In utilizing resources of this sort the worker should be aware that such j 
groups are not organized on a basis that assures consistent action on 
referrals to them, and that the recipient may not know where to turn if | 
the particular need for which he was referred is not met appropriately 
or adequately. She may therefore have to take responsibility for ascertaining 
what aid such resources have given to the individual so as to understand 
the possible necessity for further efforts in his behalf. In some cases the j 
worker may also have to plan with the voluntary group in order to 
organize and coordinate joint efforts to meet the recipient’s needs. The 
worker’s concern in carrying this responsibility is to keep the recipient from 
becoming confused about the basis on which he is receiving aid from 
these different sources, about his continued claim on the public agency, 
or about his obligations to the agency as a source of assistance. 

Service in Situations Involving Problems of 
Behavior and Personal Relationships 

In every case load there are some situations in which poverty, chronic 
illness, or marital conflict produce a bewildering number of consequences, 
such as bad housing, undernourishment, insufficient household equipment. 





27 


slovenly housekeeping, negligence in the training and supervision of the 


children, or unregulated management. In such situations the agency is 
I tempted to shift from providmg assistance, as adequate to need as the 
. agency’s general standards and funds permit, to regulating or managing 
5 , the individual’s affairs. Assistance is used as a base for disciplinary 
er, relationship to the recipient, and emphasis is placed on his conformity 
i to the agency’s plans. The agency’s doubt of the ability or desire of 
such individuals to improve their lot often results in their receiving less 
assistance than others known to the agency. When that occurs the agency 
and its w'orkers are not fulfilling their essential obligation to meet need 
on a basis that gives individuals the wherewithal to change externals in 
their situation and leaves with them the ultimate responsibility for de- 
termining their mode of life. 

When the agency sees that its main task is to provide assistance, the 
‘ relations of workers to individuals in need may follow a sounder course 
and the latent capacity of these people to take hold of their o^vm affairs 
may have a chance to assert itself. Two of many examples show how 
change in the individual’s attitudes to^vard his own situation followed a 
change in the agency’s dealings with him. 

The incapacitated father of children receiving aid to dependent chil- 
dren had been under continued pressure from the agency to pursue 
for , ^ medical treatment and follow precautions to protect his family from 

jje If' infection. The mother, careless in her housekeeping and negligent in 

her care and supervision of the children, had been subjected to 

, j| inspections of her household and warned that assistance would be 

stopped if she could not make her husband meet the agency’s demands. 
01 ^!§ After several years of unsuccessful effort to control the recipients in 
if ^ 1 -. these ways, the case was transferred to a neAv worker for the express 
elvJ.^ purpose of changing the agency’s way of handling this particular 
ijj situation. Hitherto the payment had been measured to the family’s 
lowered standards. The worker redetermined need on a realistic basis, 
li and the payment was raised to the agency’s maximum, with supple- 
mentation from general assistance. The Avorker discontinued effort to 
regulate the family’s affairs. 

rbe Six months later the mother volunteered that she found it difficult 
Q 51 to keep her home clean and orderly. The worker asked her and the 
1 father what they thought could be done to make housekeeping easier. 
P Both eagerly discussed fundamental repairs and essential equipment 
needed for the house and engaged in working out a plan of their own 
te.' for using the assistance that the agency could provide over a 6 -month 
f period. At this point the father showed his first independent interest 
in his health, an interest which the worker acknowledged without exerting 



agency pressure on him to follow it up. 

Within another 6 months the home was noticeably improved through 
the effort and ingenuity invested by both parents in remodeling and 
furnishing it. There was also evidence of ambition on the part of 
each to master problems to which they had formerly been indifferent. 





28 


Provision of adequate assistance gave material opportunity to the re¬ 
cipients. The respect and confidence of the worker, as the agency’s 
representative, stimulated their ability to think and act for themselves. 

In another home, a succession of workers had tried in vain to 
influence an unresponsive and apparently dull young mother. Her problem 
of managing on inadequate assistance was complicated by the father’s 
alcoholic deterioration and mental irresponsibility. Her excuses for 
general neglect of her children were her inability to meet needs con¬ 
sistently and the father’s interference with any attempts to plan. 

The agency had acted on the belief that neither she nor the father 
would be able to profit by assistance greater than his always insufficient 
and uncertain earnings. In addition to close supervision of her house¬ 
keeping and care of the children, an unavailing effort had been made 
to help her understand her husband and deal with a disturbed relationship 
with him. 

When the agency decided to change its approach in this case, the 
first step was to reconsider need. The recipient was initially at a loss 
in describing the kinds of things for which she needed money. Several 
discussions were held before she was able to collect herself effectively 
and finish the business in hand. The worker concentrated exclusively 
on questions of need and what the mother herself wanted to do about 
practical problems of concern to her. The worker’s respect for the young 
woman’s capacity to work on concrete questions of need supported her 
in taking hold of her own responsibility for managing her household and 
finding her own way of changing a situation that was no longer tolerable. 

Later, this previously inert young woman came to the agency to say 
that she could not do what she should for her children if her husband 
remained in his present condition. Recently she realized that either 
he would have to change his ways and give the children a chance, or 
she would have to leave him. She could not let everything slip back 
into the old state. 

The subsequent course of action was directed from point to point 
by the mother’s resolution to gain control of her situation. The worker 
supplied information about possible procedures and what would be 
involved in following them. The father had no belief in psychiatric 
treatment. An involuntary commitment to a State hospital was not 
possible, although the psychiatrist who was consulted had no doubt 
that he was psychotic. The mother failed on one attempt to move to 
another neighborhood and conceal her whereabouts from him and also 
in an attempt to settle in a neighboring county. After a stalemate, the 
mother decided to act on a suggestion from the worker and present a 
plan she had devised for herself to a family agency in a larger city 
of the State—to take training for a job in which her manual dexterity 
would be useful. The family agency agreed to help her in carrying it 
out. The development in this case was of the recipient’s determination 
to find an active solution to her problems. 

Defining the Agency^s Responsibility in 
Problems of Personal Relationships 

To establish the proper basis for service, the agency must define for 





29 


tself and its workers what responsibility it takes for problems in the 
)ersonal relationships and behavior of persons to whom it is providing 


issistance. 

Questions about agency responsibility for dealing with personal problems 
irise in various connections. Difficulties in family relationships may be 
nentioned by the individual who is requesting or receiving assistance, or 
hey may be known to the worker even though the recipient makes no 
reference to them. In some cases the agency and its workers may have 
lirect reason to be concerned about problems in relationships and be- 
lavior that affect the individual’s eligibility or his obligations as applicant 
3 r recipient. In other situations, the worker feels a concern about a 
aaarital disagreement, or the parent’s attitude toward a child, or a daughter s 
treatment of an aged parent, or a widow’s relations with a masculine 
friend. Sometimes another agency, such as the court or school, asks the 
agency providing assistance to take responsibility for supervising some 
member of the family in meeting an educational or health regulation or 
some standard of conduct. Questions about obligations for dealing with 


personal problems in assistance cases may arise because the agency com¬ 
bines various services under a single administration and assigns to one 
worker responsibility for providing several different types of sefvice to 
the same family. For example, the agency may have to administer aid 
to dependent children under a “suitability of home” requirement.^ 

Though the administration of assistance as a right excludes the imposi¬ 
tion or giving of help on undefined and indirect grounds, the public 
assistance agency may have its own particular usefulness to individuals 
beset with personal difficulties in relationships or behavior. The occasions 
for this service occur when personal difficulties affect the individual’s 
[discharge of his defined and known obligations to the agency or when 
the action the individual might take about his problem involves some 
issue of eligibility and the amount of the assistance payment. The first 
responsibility of the worker in such situations is to make clear to individual 
applicants and recipients whatever connections there may be between 
these problems and the conditions affecting eligibility. If decisions are 
involved for the individual, the worker should make sure that he under¬ 
stands the concrete considerations that bear on them. 

The purpose of the worker is to enable the individual to find his own 
way to deal with his difficulty. To accomplish this purpose, the worker 
must have the capacity to recognize and respect the feelings of the 
individual and to clarify the practical alternatives open to him so that 
he may have the opportunity to measure possibilities and consequences 

2 See ‘“Suitable Home’ Provisione of Stale Plana for Aid to Dependent Children ’’ 

Bulletin, April 1945, pp. 19-21. summarized from statement with the same title, sent by the Bureau 
of Public Assistance under date of March 5, 1945, to State agencies. 




30 


and so to objectify his problem and deal with it rationally. Such service 
was given to the following family, which was receiving aid to dependent 
children. ( 

The mother had repeatedly deserted three children under 6. Shi 
had married for a second time a man for whom her children were ai * 
obstacle to the roving life he wanted. He left her but periodically ji 
yielded to her overtures by sending her money to join him wherevef j 
he happened to be. When she had been with him for a month or so^ jj 
however, she would quarrel with him about his refusal to live with the I 
children, and these quarrels would end by his sending her home. ; f 
On the mother’s return, the worker explained to her that the particulaj? I* 
purpose of aid to dependent children was to enable a mother to care t 
for her children if she wished, and that the agency could not continue li 
to grant her aid to dependent children when it was so uncertain that [ 
the children were really going to have a home with her. ^ 

The mother told the worker about her troubles with her husband 
and her inability to decide whether there was any way of settling them. 
The worker recognized her dilemma and how it made it difficult fol !• 
her to stay home and give the children the care they required. The 1 
worker mentioned several other possibilities for caring for the children: f 
there might be relatives who would take them, or foster home or insti* j 
tutional care might be possible if the mother wanted to be free of ^ 
them to work out her problem with her husband. The mother soberly ! 
inquired into these possibilities but concluded that her problem 
with her husband was that she wanted the children and could not get 
along without them. She had not realized before that she had been 
deserting them. She wanted to write to her husband to see whether 
this new development would affect his attitude, and she asked whether 
the worker could arrange to have him interviewed. Within 6 weeks she 
made her decision to stay with her children and seemed to have settled 
with herself that both her responsibility and her desire were to maintain 
a home for them. 

Similar service was given in another home where a husband and wife 
were recipients of old-age assistance. 

The husband and. wife quarreled incessantly, to the detriment of 
their health and any order in their regime. Each tried to enlist the 
agency in an alliance against the other. Their loss of control was 
evident in violent scenes in the presence of the worker. Each accused 
the other of constant abuse and demanded that the worker make the 
other behave. After several episodes in which the wife threatened to 
leave her husband, the worker followed up the wife’s talk of leaving! 
him, defining the different arrangements possible under the agency’s 
policies and standards and indicating to the husband a willingness to 
discuss what he wished to do if they decided on a separation. The 
recipients considered their situation and later presented to the worker 
the plan they had worked out together. They wished to move to a 
neighborhood within easier access of old friends. Increased social oppor¬ 
tunities, they said, would keep them from getting on each other’s nerves 






31 


so much. The wife had decided to reneAv neglected medical treatments, 

and the husband wanted help with plans for keeping himself occupied. 

Conclusion 

The agency has a responsibility for defining the basis on which it 
furnishes assistance and for differentiating this from the basis on which 
Its workers may undertake other activities for the same individual. To 
3 :eep clear the basis on which it makes assistance payments, the agency 
foust have a precise understanding of the responsibility imposed upon it 
.•n administering assistance as a right. The agency and its workers must 
ee that eligibility for assistance is established and maintained according 
o requirements and obligations it defines in advance as applicable to all 
individuals in similar circumstances. The agency’s service includes what- 
!ver help the individual desires in establishing and maintaining his eligibility 
ind in obtaining other service from the agency or from other sources. 
\n essential characteristic of this service is that the individual is free 
i o accept or reject it, and that the worker in offering it recognizes with 
iiim his liberty to take or leave it as he thinks best. This basis for service 
tijxcludes any activity on the part of the worker that would lead the 
I individual to believe that he must comply with special suggestions or 
tiemands for changes in his relationships or conduct in order to maintain 
• lis eligibility for assistance. 

if The agency has a responsibility to make a clear distinction between 
i; lie requirements and obligations it has defined for all individuals in similar 
5 jircumstances and any demands for changed behavior that would be special 
I to the individual situation. In administering assistance as a right, the 

I agency is bound not to use the individual’s economic helplessness for 
purposes that have not been generally declared and defined even though 

I I these purposes are presumably inspired by interest in the individual’s wel¬ 
fare or the welfare of his dependents. Since the agency is an agency of 
government, its workers should not employ the powers and resources of 
government for purposes that are individually determined by them. Service 
that is directed to changing the individual’s behavior or relationships or 

I to supervising or regulating his management of his affairs is therefore 
at odds with fulfillment of the agency’s primary duty, the provision of 
assistance as a right, that is, on a basis of mutual obligation that is 
plainly stated by the agency and can be made known in advance to 
the individual. 

When the agency has responsibility for follow-up or supervisory services 
to courts, schools, or other authoritative agencies, its basis for these 
activities in assistance cases should be carefully distinguished from its 
basis for providing assistance, and the difference should be made clear 
both to the referring authoritative agency and to the recipients concerned. 







I 


32 

The agency should be careful to distinguish between the requiremenfi 
of school or court and its own eligibility requirements and to make deal 
the difference between the individual’s obligations to the' agency as i 
recipient of assistance and his obligations to conform to the regulation 
of the school or to obey the orders of the court. In these instances tltf 
workers would again have to differentiate between a real responsibility 
for informing the individual about the possible effects of his decisionii 
on his eligiblity and payment and an improper pressure on him tfl 
meet school or court requirements in order to maintain his eligibili^: 
status with the agency. I 

When the agency directs and regulates its services in providing assistancB 
in accordance with the dictates of a right, the course that it will take in 
problems of individual relationships and behavior becomes clear. The 
agency and its workers will see that neither persuasion nor compulsion 
is exercised on an individual to accept help with a personal problem as 
a condition to establishing or maintaining his eligibility for assistance. It| 
will restrain itself and its workers in this regard, whether the help in ques*;; 
tion would be provided by the worker who administers assistance, a! 
worker in another department of the agency, or by another public or; 
private agency. Pursuit of this course does not exclude discussion by 
the worker of a possible need and desire of the individual for help with j 
a personal problem, but requires that such discussion leave to the individual' 
the freedom and responsibility for deciding whether he wants to obtain)! 
the help available. A recipient may ask the agency for a special service,- 
such as help in making a plan outside the home for a child, or finding i 
out what can be done about a serious health problem in the family, or 
considering what action might be taken in a marital difficulty. In such | 
circumstances the worker needs to distinguish between her direct responsi¬ 
bility for telling the recipient what action is possible and how any particular 
action may affect his eligibility or payment and the very different pro-^, 
ceeding of telling him what he should or must do. If the recipient’s 
difficulty is an inability to decide what he wants to do and he desires i 
special help in understanding and solving this difficulty, the agency’s re-i! 
sponsibility is to help him locate the appropriate special service in an 
agency assuming responsibility for treating such personal problems. 

Washington, D. C. 

September 1944. 

☆u. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1946-696972 ] 

I 








Ihe Implications of the Federal Social Security 
Act for Social Work Agency Practice 


Money-Giving in Social Work Agencies - 
in Retrospect and in Prospect 





JUL 311947 


Federal Security Agency 
Social Security Administration 
Bureau of Public Assistance 


Public Assistance Report No, 11 











-K - V> . • « 


,,=■,-/» •'i.- v r3»»‘ 

■'-.aS-s*' . m'-:'--. 

.■%«. ^ ^ J • , . • . !< 

■ '4 ' . ^ • ' '. .T '. . _ 

> \ 




■ /r./ " 






* 


. ? •' 
*> t j •" 

rf: . 






r • 




' *isrf-^yA¥v.;-. 


Ifcr^ -** ^ 

‘■' 1 ‘ 4 : < 5 /«^ 

:• - ji-tsp’ 


••, ’''V-* i ■', 

■*.y 


/ < i 1 . -^4 • . ^ ’ 

! % ^ 


*■4 • 



.•jf V ' . : 

, ?jMi '-v " 

•aOf •*’ * 

. ■“ " V. *^y. -, 






vs?; 


s: 


i 0t 


t. 


v ''■.'I'. . *<!> ■^'‘. ^V'A 


> » 



, ,''j .■' •■'fin 

A- 'n -Li ,.. 




^ 


'» ’ .’I 


♦ -* ' 
Jm» 


A'"!* 











Uie Implications of the Federal Social Security- 
Act for Social Woric Agency Practice 


Money-Gi-Ting in Social Woiic Agencies - 
in Retrospect and in Prospect 


By, 

Elma Ashton 

h 


Federal Security Agency 
Social Security Administration 
Bureau of Public Assistance 


Public Assistance Report No. 11 



FOREWORD 


The Bureau of Public Assistance is glad to add to the slowly accumulating 
literature in public assistance these two papers by Elma H. Ashton: "The 
In^jlications of the Federal Social Security Act for Social Work Agency 
Practice," and "Money-Giving in Social Work Agencies - in Retrospect and in 
Prospect," The author is now Fellowship Counselor with the Fellowship 
Branch of UNRRA. She was on the staff of the Bureau of Public Assistance 
from 1944 to 1946 when the Bureau undertook intensive work in the area of 
standards of assistance. These papers embody a statement of some of the 
ideas that were influential in this phase of the Bureau’s work, as well as 
new paths of inquiry that need further exploration. Miss Ashton’s own 
interest led her to an analysis of the philosophical implications of the 
Social Security Act and of the problems that professional social workers 
encounter in carrying responsibility for money giving. The statements she 
developed were found to be clarifying and provocative to Miss Ashton’s 
immediate associates. They are, therefore, being offered to a wider profes¬ 
sional audience, including the staff of the Bureau of Public Assistance and 
of State and local agencies administering assistance, and to persons in 
teaching and related fields who have an interest in public assistance and 
its meaning to the field of social work as a whole. In making these state¬ 
ments generally available, it is our hope that they will be helpful to 
social workers in putting into practice the objectives suggested, with the 
resultant benefits to those whom these programs are designed to serve, 

Jane M. Hoey, Director 

Bureau of Public Assistance 


ACKNOWLEDCMEl^T 

These two papers grew out of ray experience as a member of the staff of the 
Bureau of Public Assistance and express my own conviction that in our kind 
of democracy there are certain basic essentials in the relationship of 
government and citizens in every governmental service, including the 
service of financial assistance. My convictions have been strengthened 
as I have worked in the UNRRA fellowship program with trainees from certain 
foreign countries and have gained a sense of the foreigners’ deep apprecia¬ 
tion of the nature of the relationship of government and citizen in this 
country, 

I should like to express my appreciation to Jane M, Hoey and Pauline Miller 
for their interest in this material as it was developed and also in its 
distribution; and my especial appreciation to Vocille M, Pratt for her 
specific and invaluable help throughout the period of the development of 
the ideas and in the actual formulation of the statements, 

' Elma H. Ashton 

February 1947 


The Implications of the Federal Social Security Act 

For Social 7fork Agency Practice 


(Kie Federal Social Security Act speaks significantly to social 
■workers in its expression of -v^at our government intends for its people 
■who seek financial help from government and also in the implications of 
that expression for practice of private and public agencies that offer 
any kind of service to any member of our democracy, Ihis paper speaks 
to social Tforkers from ■bhese t^wo points of view and attempts to present 
a -way of thinlcing about social work agency practice in our democracy. 

Social workers have had ten years of experience in categorical 
assistance programs established by the Social Security Act; ten years of 
learning to represent government, as staff members of agencies, in 
administering assistance to the groups specified in the act. This year, 
as we evaluate the accomplishments and progress of the decade, it seems 
timely to review -fehe Federal act, explore its implications, and look at 
our practice in terms of those implications. 

The Federal Act - An Expression of a Democracy 

Basic to our democratic way of life is the provision of opportunity 
for every indi-vidual to become a responsible, participating member of the 
democracy, participating ■sd.th his government in matters that pertain to 
his personal welfare and the Nation's general vrelfare, participating in 
the life of his community in the sense of belonging to his community. The 
democratic principle in operation allows opportunity to the individual to 
be or become vdiatever he is capable of being or becoming through the active 
use of his abilities ■within the democratic framework. 

In such a societal setting, each individual contributes of himself 
and his resources and thus participates in creating the whole from which 
each derives whatever benefit he is capable of using. Every indi'\n.dual has 
a right to share bo^fch as a contributor to and as a recipient of the benefits 
of the Nation, 

To maintain a ■vital, creative democracy, the governmental structure 
and its way of functioning must enable every person to achieve maximum 
productivity, to carry his part of the responsibility for the functioning 
of the democracy, and to make effective his right to receive the benefits. 
Any law -within the governmental pattern must be an organic part of the 
democratic structure, contributing directly or indirectly to the welfare of 
the individual as a responsible participating member of his community and 
the Nation, 

The Social Security Act, a law -within -this democratic pattern, is an 
expression of the interdependence of the whole and its parts, of government 
and its people. Government has created a money service for the benefit of 





- 2 - 


itself, and the benefits are therefore available as a citizen's right* 
Significant Provisions of the Assistance lltles 


Tne Social Security Act is designed to provide for the general 
welfare, and the assistance provisions were established to enable States 
to furnish financial assistance to certain needy individuals (the aged, 
^pendent children, and the blind) . 

The act requires that States assure the client's right to appeal to 
the State agency against the decision of the local agency or individual 
staff worker; the client's right to have the information about his circum¬ 
stances kept confidential; and the client's right to money payments, 
interpreted to mean pajonents unrestricted as to the way the money is spent. 

Writing a general welfare purpose into the Federal legislation that 
includes financial assistance to individuals is an indication that the 
representatives of the people of these United States saw an intimate rela¬ 
tion between our government's accepting responsibility to provide money to 
people in need and its responsibility for the general welfare. Requiring 
the administering agencies to observe the right to appeal, confidentiality 
of information, and unrestricted money payments implies a recognition that 
the way States give money to needy individuals has significance for the 
general welfare; or more specifically, that in carrying out the responsi¬ 
bility of providing such assistance States must preserve certain individual 
values essential to the general welfare. 

General Implications as Regards "Needj^ People 

By assuming responsibility for the preservation of certain rights of 
needy individuals, the government implied a knowledge of the burden of 
stigma that has been borne by recipients of assistance and of its intention 
to assume responsibility for creating a program directed toward lightening 
that burden. 

The fact that an individual receives his means of support from an 
assistance agency rather than from wages or other recognized income is a 
fact of difference from his neighbors that cannot be denied or dismissed 
lightly. Ihere is a deeply rooted tradition in this country that the person 
Tidio is "anybody" supports himself by his own efforts. There is, therefore, 
a general feeling that it is right for an individual to work for his living, 
to gain his source of support through investment or business enterprise, or 
to be supported by relatives. Inherent in this sense of the rightness of 
these ways of providing one's livelihood is the feeling that there is some¬ 
thing wrong about getting one's support from a source created by the idiole, 
but to which one has not directly contributed his labor or his money; thus, 
the individual -vdio gets his support from a social agency is considered in a 
group "apart," culturally different from his neighbors. Ihis feeling exists 
in the client, in his neighbors, and sometimes in the representative of the 
agency. 








- 3 - 


!I!he provisions of the Social Security Act that establish specific 
rights of the needy individual express the Nation's recognition of the 
fact that the needy individual's belonging to and responsible participa¬ 
tion in the life of his community are essential to the democracy of that 
community. Ihese specific provisions recognize the needy individual's 
strength and abilities 3 the fact that he is like his neighbors and belongs 
to his community; and, because of the differences in his source of support, 
the necessity for his government to be actively interested in providing him 
the opportunity to achieve and maintain a feeling of likeness to his 
neighbors and a sense of belonging to and being an active participant in 
his community. 

Implication of Specific Provisions for Administrative Action 

Three specific provisions of the Social Security Act require admin¬ 
istrative action in relation to certain claims a needy individual may make 
upon the governmental agency. Ihe dominant component of each requirement 
is an individual value that must be assured the citizen if he is to achieve 
an active, responsible relationship to his government and be a vital par¬ 
ticipant in the democratic -way of life. 

The appeal provision .—The appeal provision is tangible evidence of 
the government's assumption of responsibility to assure to the needy indi¬ 
vidual the opportunity of self-assertion in his relations vath the govern¬ 
mental agency —just as any other citizen is assured the opportunity to 
speak for himself in presenting his demands to his government. Ihe right 
of individual self-assertion -with government is essential to democratic 
functioning and significantly differentiates democracy from certain other 
types of governmental pattern. If we dislike what our leaders do and say, 
we have ways of expressing our dissent. If we have ideas, we have ways of 
making them known. If a decision concerning us seems unfair, we can appeal. 
All of these ways of assertion are open to all citizens. 

Ihe needy individual, because he lacks economic independence in a 
culture in which economic independence gives status, may feel insecure in 
expressing himself, and may even feel he has no right to express himself. 
For him, therefore, it is in^jortant that his government not only give 
tangible evidence of his right to sp*eak for himself but assure him the 
opportunity to do so. The right of appeal has value for the individual to 
the extent that he knows udiat he can claim from his government, and under 
what circumstances; to the extent that he knows he is expected to assert 
his rights as he sees them. He needs to know that government itself gives 
him the right to go beyond the person who made the decision, to go to 
higher authorities and participate with the fina'l authority in decisions 
that affect him. To make its provision for individual appeal a reality, 
the government must be actively concerned that the administering agency is 
actually making the provision effective. 






- 4 - 


Ihe confidentiality provision ^—The confidentiality provision 
expresses our government’s assumption of responsibility for protecting 
individual privacy in a citizen’s relationship ydth his government. An 
individual must share with his government by giving information about 
himself to "whatever extent is necessary for him to gain the benefits of 
governmental service. A person who applies for an automobile license, a 
driver’s license, a passport, must give certain information specific to 
the request. 

For many reasons that we need not review here, the fact of asking 
for public "relief" has, in the past, placed "the "needy" individual in the 
position of revealing his own affairs to vhatever extent an agency 
requested^ and his "need" was often regarded as creating a necessity for 
the agency to inquire into those affairs beyond the limited area that would 
establish eligibility for the service. The Social Security Act sets up 
certain eligibility requirements, and the administrative agency must get 
sufficient information to establish the fact of eligibility. However, the 
act both limits the facts that a State agency must ascertain and attempts 
to assure that the information given will be held confidential. That 
government has accepted its responsibility thus to protect the needy indi¬ 
vidual indicates its recognition "that he has more difficulty than others 
in protecting his own privacy. 

The confidentiality provision has significance for the needy individ¬ 
ual to the extent that he kno"ws that his government -will inquire of him only 
what is essential to establishing his claim; that his government expects 
him to protect his own privacy and -will support him in so doing; that his 
government will treat as confidential whatever information he gives. To 
make real the government’s interest in assuring the individual an opportu¬ 
nity for privacy, the government must assume responsibility for seeing that 
its representative carries out the purpose of the provision. 

The unrestricted money payment .—The unrestricted money payment 
expresses government’s intent to the individual to exercise personal 
responsibility in a money economy. The usual medium of exchange in our 
society is money. A person buys what he wishes and can afford of the 
available commodities. In general, he gains his status as a community 
member by his active participation in the money economy; securing for him¬ 
self and his family the goods and services that he considers the essentials 
of TjLfe and contributing his part to community institutions. He hxjys from 
his grocer and his clothier, pays rent to his landlord, pays for his ticket 
to the movies, his carfare, and so forth, and contributes to his church, his 
club, his community fund. He provides for his old age and for periods of 
ill health and unemployment through purchase of insurance or contributions 
to some sort of fund; and he contributes to his government through payment 
of taxes. The extent to -which an individual purchases and contributes is 
determined by what he has, what he wants for himself, and what he is willing 
to contribute, except that his contribution to his government is determined 
by the government on the basis of his income and possessions. 







- 5 - 


Communities accept in individuals a wide range of differences in 
source of income and ability and willingness to participat.e in community 
affairs through use of money. Two groups that risk being rejected by the 
community, however, are those who lack money and cannot, and those who 
have money and will not, carry what the community considers their reason¬ 
able share of community responsibilities. The person who has money but 
keeps his participation in the community below a reasonable level brings 
himself, into conflict with his conmunity. If he does not pay his debts or 
displays other antisocial behavior, the' force of law goes into action 
against him. If he does not provide himself with clothing and housing 
that the conmunity considers decent, the force of community attitudes will 
move against him either by active protest or by ostracism. If he fails to 
avail himself of community services and to contribute to community life, 
his fellow citizens have ways of showing their disfavor. Within certain 
limits he is free to defy the community way of life and'thus isolate him¬ 
self, or enter into conflict with his fellow citizens. He vails to be 
different and vdlls to take the consequences. Tie government takes its 
proper responsibility toward this citizen when it sets up ways in which he 
may, if he wishes, become a responsible participating member of the commu¬ 
nity. The government also takes its proper responsibility in relation to 
the general welfare—the protection of individuals in their personal 
freedom—vhen it makes no further demand on that individual except when he 
fails to meet governmental obligations or endangers others. 

The individual vdio has no money, or so little that he cannot pur¬ 
chase what he needs and cannot contribute to his community, is in no 
position to be a responsible participant in his community. His participa¬ 
tion is limited not by his own will but by his economic circumstances. He 
cannot keep himself adequately fed, housed, and clothed and in good health. 
He cannot pay his church dues or contribute to other community institutions. 
Because he has no money and cannot participate and because he is aware of 
the accepted way of life and his difference from that way, he feels his own 
inadequacy,and his neighbors "look down on him." Because the community 
cannot justify its rejection of him, its attitudes and behavior toward him 
are confused and conflicting but generally disapproving. Toward this indi¬ 
vidual, the government has a responsibility to make sufficient money 
available so that he can participate in the money economy and buy what he 
needs for decent living and for making a reasonable contribution to the life 
of the community. In addition, the government should make that money 
available in such a way that he can achieve a sense of belonging by the 
very fact that he is sharing in one important aspect of the democratic way 
of life. In carrying out this responsibility toward him, the government is 
fulfilling its responsibility for the general vrelfare, in that democracy 
is made real only as all members have opportunity to and do become respon¬ 
sible participants in its functioning. 

Implications for Social Yfork Agency Practice 

Social workers in public assistance have learned more and more about 
how to carry out the intent of the Social Security Act throxigh thoughtful 



- 6 - 


administration of its provisions* Experience has established for us the 
"rightness* of the public assistance provisions. Have we, however, 
examined the act and its provisions for the implications for all social 
work agency practice? Let us look at the fact that we tell only part of 
the story when we say, "these provisions are appropriate for public 
assistance clients." Kie vdiole story is that these provisions are in the 
act for public assistance recipients because they are appropriate for all 
citizens of our democracy. 

llie Constitution, the Bill of Rights, the democratic folkways and 
mores, the verbal expressions of a people establish a base out of viiich 
the Nation takes form. Laws are the tangible expression of the Nation that 
set an organic pattern mthin which its people move. The citizens' relation 
to government is made tangible through law, but law is merely an expression 
of the citizens* proper relation to any part of the democratic pattern—any 
of democracy's institutions. 

Social work agencies, vdiether private or public and vdiether they give 
money or "service," are integral parts of the democratic pattern. They are 
expressions of a community, a State, or a Nation, lliey have grown out of 
and upon our constitutional base. They are part of a society in which 
giving and taking are correlative, in which the individual contributes to 
the whole in various ways and in varying degrees, in which the whole 
establishes services, in which the individual benefits from the whole through 
its services that he can use. 

The client of any of our agencies is a member of his government and 
his community and has rights and privileges as such. He has a right to 
express himself about the services his community or State or Nation will 
provide; to know the established services of the established public and 
private agencies and the conditions under which he can avail himself of 
those services; to express himself within and outside the agency concerning 
the kind and quality of the service he and his fellow citizens are receiv¬ 
ing; to expect confidential handling of matters that pertain to him and 
protection of his privacy; and to use the community services or money pro¬ 
vided for him in the way that suits his purposes. 

Every experience in life is important to each of us, for it is 
through our experiences that we gain or lose our sense of our own strengths, 
capacities, and value, and establish our relationship to the world in which 
we live. The client's experience with the agency is a significant life expe¬ 
rience, one in which he will get some kind of feeling about himself as a 
person and in which he will, at least in part, establish his relation to his 
community or his government. Any agency that has a "helping" function has a 
responsibility for setting up a structure and effecting a process that will 
give to every person who seeks its service an opportunity to gain and main¬ 
tain a sense of his own value as a person and as a functioning member of our 
democracy, with the rights, privileges, and responsibilities that are 
inherent in the democratic way of life. Only when an agency achieves this 
way of operating does it become a vital part of our democratic pattern. 


August 1946 
Washington, D.C 


Money-Giving in Social »*ork Agencies - 

in Retrospect and in Prospect 


Money is an essential in our economy# With it we not only purchase 
the commodities we need and want but we establish our status as citizens of 
the coamiunity» ’Without it we cannot purchase what we need to live decently# 
Without it we are likely to lose our sense of our own value to ourselves, 
to those near to us, and to our fellow citizens# 

Because of the essential quality of money and its psychological 
concomitants, it is difficult for us to ask for or accept money, especially 
when we need it, or to offer it as help to another, or to withhold it from 
one who asks for it# In social work practice the problems that arise in 
giving financial assistance reflect our personal problems in giving money, 
for the profession has not yet developed a body of knowledge, a way of think¬ 
ing and a way of operating in this area that help us make the shift from 
giving money as a private individual to giving agency money as a professional 
person# A cursory glance at our professional history shows that at the 
beginning we failed to recognize that the giving of money was a proper area 
of professional practice# Later, having recognized that it was an inevitable 
part of agency responsibility, we struggled to learn how to give it profes¬ 
sionally when helping with money presented both the agency and the worker 
with demands and problems that had not been recognized as present in other 
areas of helping# 

Social workers began to identify their profession when they began 
to focus on the individual's needs, feelings, and behavior, and to think 
of the profession as one of helping the individual# The significance of 
this focus cannot be overestimated, for it was throu^ the exploration of 
the dynamics of human behavior and the development of skill in working 
with human beings that social work established itself as the profession 
equipped to work in programs offering help to individuals# However, our 
efforts to understand and help individuals plunged us into a period in 
which we were so absorbed in our own learning in the psychological area 
that we lost our connection with agency and community and thus did not 
carry what we now regard as proper professional responsibility in our 
jobs# During that early period the worker, directed by her concern for 
the individual and his problem, worked as an individual with an individual 
and thou^t of herself as working with her client in a process in which 
she was limited only ly her own skill# “^e was oriented to the psychologi¬ 
cal problem of her client5 thus, when the problem the client presented was 
lack of money, she tried to relate his need for money to some psychological 
or emotional disturbance# In attempting to give money on an “individual 
basis,** she made money incidental to some kind of deeper help and measured 
her success and status ty her ability to **treat’* on this deeper level# 

In retrospect we see that money would not yield to this subjedtive, 
highly individual handling and that in reality money cannot be relegated 
to an incidental poAition when the client’s need for it is real and 
immediate# Social work has been attempting to force into an alliance two 
incompatible processes—the social worker’s highly individualized practice 




- 2 - 


as traditionally conceived, and the giving of agency money which is 
not available for the worker's unlimited use# 

When the economic depression of the thirties created an unprece¬ 
dented necessity for the provision of money to individuals, social workers 
in public and private assistance agencies had to find a way of working 
with clients in an agency setting in which the giving of money was the 
immediate objective and the worker's activity, including the amount of 
money she could give, was governed by agency-determined limits# Workers 
who had focused on functioning on an "individual basis" had reason to 
protest daily at what seemed like the agency's interference in matters ' 
that they thou^t concerned only two individuals—the worker and her 
client. 


Social workers in the policy-making positions in both public and 
private agencies tried to handle agency money-limits in such a way as to 
preserve as far as possible what they conceived of as "individual treat¬ 
ment" of the client. Home economists were brou^t into agencies to work 
on the problem of how to set reasonable limits on assistance payments, 
and the objective data they provided were generally regarded as guides# 

Some agencies used the figures on specific items as maximum amounts, 
varying the payment up to the maximum in accordance with the individual 
client's estimate# Some limited the kind or number of items that could 
be considered and, on the basis of the client's estimate of his needs, 
varied both the amount per item and the number of items within the list 
accepted by the agency# Some allowed each worker a specific amount of 
money per month for her case load and let her determine the amount for 
each client# Other agencies left the worker free to "consider" any 
amount or any number of items but set limits on the totals by reducing 
payments to a percentage of the total, for example, or subtracting a 
specific amount from the total. Still others predetermined the amounts 
for certain classifications of individuals but allowed the worker some 
leeway for "special needs" not included in a classification# 

Within the framework of these various agency-determined ways of 
giving money, workers continued to encourage their clients to discuss 
in detail their needs, item by item, and to estimate how much money they 
needed for each item# The worker could keep the illusion of giving 
money on an "individual basis" if she could get the client's long list 
of items and his money estimates, despite the actuality that the amount 
the agency would provide mi^t buy oniy one item-food, for example—in 
the client's estimate. The worker lived both'in a "dream world" of 
considering the client's individual need, and in a factual existence of 
the agency's giving and the client's receiving money on an agency-determined 
basis• 


The Social Security Act was passed at a time when agencies and 
social workers were in this dilemma of reaching for the star of "indivi¬ 
dual need" and having to keep their feet on the ground in giving money 
within the limits determined by the agency# In only a few programs of 
old-age assistance did any real departure from traditional theory and 


- 3 - 


practice develop# ' ^st of the States' methods for determining both 
need and the amount of the payment within the categorical assistance 
programs continued to emphasize the necessity for exploring the client's 
individual needs, giving the client every opportunity to list in detail 
his full needs item by item, and estimating the cost of each item* 

Our experience in social work made us aware that "needs" and 
"wants" are often so inextricably interwoven in an individual's feelings 
that he cannot isolate one from the other and that each individual's 
needs and wants vary from time to time. Actually, no individual can 
really determine all of his needs at a given moment, and certainly no 
worker can determine another person's—the client's—needs. More and 
more refinement of skill in helping clients estimate needs has led agen¬ 
cies into the curious position of discovering more and more about what 
they cannot give money for and how much they cannot give , since a really 
sympathetic and detailed estimate of the need of any one of us will almost 
inevitably reach a total that no agency can meet. This probing into 
"needs," especially when the "needs" cannot be met, is wasteful. Staff 
effort and time and thus agency money have gone into gathering informa¬ 
tion not necessary for the agency's immediate business with an individual 
client. More important still has been the harmful effect on the client 
and on his relationship with the agency. The client has become distrust¬ 
ful and fearful of the agency because of the false setting in which he 
and the worker have operated. Workers have been laboring under the 
delusion that they were considering "individual need," but in fact they 
were exploring needs as far as the worker knew how and the client was 
willing to probe for them, and then were determining the assistance pay¬ 
ment on a very different basis. 

In line with our social work tradition, some of us have continued 
to believe that to do our "best work" we must polish our method of prob¬ 
ing into the client's needs, while the prosaic fact of agency function 
and limitation of funds has led to the establishment of agency determinants 
for administering assistance. As soon as agency determinants move in, 
"individual needs" as traditionally conceived become subordinated. The 
social work theory and practice that have created these difficulties for 
agencies and client in the administration of financial assistance have 
carried certain implicaticns that some social workers are now beginning 
to question, in sach terras as the following examples. 

Does not the Implication that the worker's effectiveness with her 
client is in direct proportion to her freedom to operate as an individual 

with an individual suggest that a social worker can be a free agent? 

Most social workers recognize today that the worker, who in her profes¬ 
sional role gives agency money to people, must operate as a representa¬ 
tive of an agency. She is giving money that is not her own and giving 
it because it is her Job to give it, and she is free only within the 
limits of her agency. If she had a private practice of her own, she 
would not have these limitations, but neither v/ould she be able to draw 
on the resources of the community or government; nor would she and the 
client have the protections and the positive values of a definite 
agency structure. 








- ii - 


l3 It ■good** for an Individual (the client) to expose all the 
details of his life to a social worker? To examine this question we 
should consider the fact that the client, like the rest of us, finds 
his positive relation to living throu^ truly sharing with others; and 
he truly shares only when, in the sharing, he has a sense of his own 
control in his activity* 

The agency that places upon the worker responsibility for determin¬ 
ing what information she will require of the client places her in the posi¬ 
tion of making personal demands on the agency’s client and places the 
client in the position of submitting to or struggling against another 
person’s will. In submitting, he gains no strength for himself; in strug¬ 
gling he uses his strength in the fi^t and cannot use the worker in her 
capacity as helper* 

Ihe agency has a responsibility to establish the specific informa¬ 
tion that must be sought—information directly related to the service— 
and to limit the inquiry to those specific items* In so doing, the 
agency gives the worker a setting in iriiich she can be a representative 
speaking for the agency, rather than an individual speaking for herself* 
Released from the struggle against the worker’s will to know him, the 
client can feel free to use the worker’s help in meeting the agency—in 
focusing on the conditions of its service* With her help he may be able 
to move throu^ his own inner struggle and confusion to a decision 
whether he can or cannot share the information the agency requires and 
whether or not he wishes to use the agency* 

If he decides he wishes to use the agency, knowing what he must 
share, he may by the very act of sharing gain a sense of his own posi¬ 
tive move, of his own activity, of his own control in the sharing, and 
of his cwn control of himself* He can know the boundaries of his 
relationship with the agency and can know also that he has a private 
life that he may keep to himself or share in other relationships as he 
sees fit* 

In the process of determining the need of the individual, must a 
worker discuss needs item by item in order to "individualize the client**? 

It seems important to point out tkai, no matter what service is offered, 

the agency that claims a helping function has an obligation to so render 
its service that the applicant or recipient will get a sense of the 
agency’s recognition of him as an individual who has his own ri^ts, 
privileges, and strengths and who can make his own choices with some feel¬ 
ing of confidence in his choice* This kind of relationship can be estab¬ 
lished whether the client is asking for much or little, for money or some 
other kind of service, provided the agency takes its proper responsibility 
in making clear to him what the agency can do, helping him define his own 
request, making clear what he must do to avail himself of the agency’s 
service, helping him in the process of making his choices; and, if he 
chooses to use the agency’s service, helping him use that service to his 
own best advantage* 






- 5 - 


Are law and policy negative forces in social work? Earlier 
^liefs that law and policy are inherently "negative” have given way 
increasingly to the recognition that government, operating throu^ law 
and public agency policy, and the community, operating through private 
agency policy, are responsible positive forces that provide the money 
that social workers as agency representatives administer to individuals. 

If we, as social workers, are to carry out the purposes of government 
and community, it seems essential that we recognize the positive nature 
of the responsibility that government and community have assumed and 
that we use our knowledge, experience, and skill in creating policies 
and procedures that reflect the positive nature of the responsibility* 

Government (local, State, and Federal) has assximed responsibility 
for making money available to certain needy people throu^ public assist¬ 
ance and has given social workers an opportunity to work in agencies 
designed to carry out this responsibility. As social workers in those 
agencies, we have the responsibility to establish a method that will not 
rely solely on our personal ability to work with people but will utilize 
our professional skill in administering a program so that we express 
government’s intent to give this service in such a way that citizens who 
use it can have the same sense of governmental protection and of individ¬ 
ual freedom that they have in using other types of governmental service, 

• At any point at which government recognizes that a specific kind 
of public service is necessarj'- for the good of all, it generally assumes 
that specific responsibility. In services other than assistance, govern¬ 
ment establishes what it will do and what the individual must do to 
benefit from the service. Both the government’s and the individual’s roles 
are known or knowable to all, Ihe requirements placed upon the individual 
are related specifically to the service. No agent has freedom to make 
additional requirements or to deqy the service to any individual who meets 
the established requirements. 

This pattern of known and specific relationship between government 
and its citizens gives the citizen a sense of government’s concern for 
him, its protection of him, its recognition of him as a responsible member 
of a democracy. The citizen can know that he must assume certain responsi¬ 
bilities if he is to use the services, and he can be free to use or not 
use them because he knows both what government will do and what he must do. 

Government can make possible this same quality of relationship 
with its citizens who seek financial assistance if it establishes what 
it considers a basic content of living that should be available to all 

its citizens; if it establislies the amount oi* money required to 

purchase this basic content ^ and if it also establishes how mucK 
money it will provide and vfhat the individual must do to avail himself 
of this governmental service—that is, money. 










- 6 - 


Thus far, under the public assistance titles of the Social 
Security Act, the Federal Government has assumed the responsibility for 
granting money to States "to furnish assistance, as far as practicable, 
under the conditions in such State" to certain groups of needy individ¬ 
uals only# Each State therefore now has the responsibility of estab¬ 
lishing what it considers the content of living that its citizens should 
have money to purchase. The Federal Government, moreover, is now making 
studies to establish a Nation-wide basic content of living, ^.^len such 
a "content” is established, it will be available to all governmental 
agencies. Federal, State, and local, for use in their various programs# 
State public assistance agencies will then know what the Federal Govern¬ 
ment considers the essentials for assuring that its people are decently 
fed, clothed, and housed, are in good health and have an opportunity 
for participation in the normal activities of the conmunity. A State 
agency can determine what this content of living will cost in the 
various sections of the State and can determine what part of this content 
it will make available to its citizens throu^ its assistance programs. 

Mth the development of this basic content of living, social 
workers will have an additional knowledge that thej*- can use in formulat¬ 
ing agency policy and in working with the people v/ho seek financial 
assistance. The known fact that there is a recognized content that 
everybody must have in order to live decently is a focus of operation 
very different from the focus of "what do you need." In the latter, the, 
client carries a burden of proving that he, in his state of "not having," 
needs certain things. In the former, the agency asserts its own knowl¬ 
edge that everybody needs certain basic essentials and that the agency's 
reason for being is to make money available to supplement what an individ¬ 
ual has, so that he can purchase the basic'minimum that everybody needs* 

In the realm of policy, the social worker will have as a focus 
what the agency knows about basic needs of people and what the agency 
can do within that known. State policy and procedures will reflect this 
shift in focus throu^ a reorganization of procedural material with new 
emphases, and through clear presentation of the knowns, and clear instruc¬ 
tions concerning the worker's explorations with the client. Specifically, 
there would be a presentation of the basic essentials that everybody has 
to have , with a detailed description, for the worker's reference, of the 
elements that make up those essentials, as well as the details of the 
agency's plan for determining eligibility and granting assistance. 

The known facts that the worker can share with persons applying 
for assistance and that will put something different into the relation¬ 
ship are ( 1 ) what the Nation has decided are the basic requirements for 
people in this country tb live decently, and (2) what part of those 
requirements her agency will be responsible for providing when the individ¬ 
ual's own resources will not do so. Ihe client can get a sense of his 







- 7 - 


own value as an individual in the worker's recognition of him as a 
person who needs money to secure a basic content of living in order to 
live decently and to be a participating member of our democracy# This 
recognition establishes his "likeness" to his fellow citizens, in a 
situation in which he feels keenly the burden of his difference, in not 
being able to proviae for himself the essentials that he, like his fellow 
citizens, needs# 

No matter how an agency gives money to "needy" individuals, the 
client will have feelings about asking for money, about taking it from 
another, about taking it on another's terms, about using it on his own 
terms when he feels that it belongs to another* Once the agency has 
established the terms of its responsibility, however, the client will 
no longer have to struggle with the vforker to establish what ^ needs 
and can concentrate on establishing what he has * He will no longer have 
to be involved in the feeling struggle of "Should I ask for much or 
little?" '*\Yill the worker like me if I ask for much?" ""^iill she think 
I am not 'in need' if I ask for little?" and the like# He can make 
clear what he has, and be free to express his feelings about having to 
ask and take, and about using what is given by another* He and the 
worker will have a more concrete working basis and can more easily find 
the real bases of his conflicting feelings. The client will be in a 
known relationship with the agency, and the very clarity of that relation¬ 
ship will give him more freedom in it—freedom to take or leave, for he 
can know what he is taking or leavingj freedom to express his concern 
about what he is receiving, for he and the worker, throu^ their common 
knowledge of what people in his circumstances and in that community need 
and what the agency can give, have established a mutual understanding and 
confidence. He will feel free to seek information about other sources of 
help, for the quality of the relationship assures him that the worker 
both knows the limit of her own service and accepts his necessity to seek 
other services* He can sense the worker's respect for him in the way 
she shares with hljn what the agency knows and can do and in the way she 
works with him in relation to whatever he expresses about himself. 

By force of necessity, government assumed the money-giving func¬ 
tion on a large scale through assistance programs that affected the 
entire Nation# ‘.’iith that big job on their hands, representatives of 
government have had to work out more and more effective methods of parry¬ 
ing their responsibilities# Thus, most social work thinking about money¬ 
giving has been focused on public assistance# 

Vie see a trend in public assistance toward methods and practices 
that are becoming more constructive for the client and more in harmony 
with the democratic principles underlying our governmental structure and 
operation, and this trend has implications for all social work agencies 
engaged in giving money to "needy" individuals. The Federal Government 
is moving toward greater responsibility for making money available so 
that its citizens can purchase -things necessary for decency and health# 
S-ba-be governments have furnished money for groups not yet covered by 
Federal legislation# 


- 8 - 


Private agencies will continue to give money for those groups of 
persons who fall between the various government programs and for special 
purposes beyond the scope of governmental service# These agencies will 
need to look at their money-giving function in terms of its relation to 
governmental functions and also examine their methods of giving money. 

They must ask themselves such questions as: Do we duplicate a govern¬ 
mental service? Does the community including the client know the basis 
on which we give money? Can we establish with our client a clear working 
basis so that he, as well as we, understands why he is or is not eligible 
for our money, why he gets a specific amount for a specific purpose? Is 
our client free to speak as a member of the community and say what he 
thirdcs or feels about the agency’s purposes and practices in the area of 
giving money? Can the citizen take money from us and maintain his sense of 
his own value as a citizen? 

The private agency client is a citizen of his community and of 
his government just as is the public agency client. Private agencies 
are part of the democratic pattern and have responsibilities inherent in 
such a pattern# They do not operate under a specific law, but they have 
the democratic principles of our society upon which to base the structure 
within which they work vdth the citizen who seeks help# 

As long as there are, in our society, groups of "needy” people 
sufficient in number to require the Nation’s expressed concern through 
assistance agencies, as long as social workers carry responsibility for 
administering financial assistance in those agencies, we must continue to 
search for better and better methods of giving money. 


August 19U6 
Washington, D.C# 


PERSONNEL IN LOCAL OFFICES 
OF STATE PUBLIC ASSISTANCE AGENCIES 
1946 


FEDERAL SECURITY AGENCY 
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION 
Bureau of Public Asslstaunce 

Public Assistance Report No. 12 


iMlsiitisM 











PERSONNEL IN LOCAL OFFICES 
OF STATE PUBLIC ASSISTANCE AGENCIES 

19 4 6 


PART I. SALARIES 


by 

Vivian B. Norman 
and 

Dorothy R, Bucklin 


Statistics and Analysis Division 
Bureau of Public Assistence 


Public Assistance Report No. 12 


FEDERAL SECUPJTY AGENCY 
Social Security Administration 
Washington, D.C. 

August 1947 


r 





CONTENTS 


Page 


Introduction... 1 

Directors... 4 

Supervisors............ 11 

Visitors. 17 

Clerks..... 27 

Interclass Comparisons. 32 

Field Representatives. 37 

Appendix A; Excluded ErnploTees. 39 

Appendix B: Definitions. 40 

Appendix C: Scheduled Hours of Work......... 41 

Appendix D: Reporting Period..... 42 

Appendix E: Local Offices with Supervisors. 43 

Appendix Tables.. 44 


TABLES 


Table Pag< 

1. Distribution of directors* salaries........ 4 

2. Distribution of 33 agencies by average (median) salary 

of directors... 6 

3. Distribution of 33 agencies by interquartile range in 

directors* salatries.......... 7 

4. Number of offices, number v/ith 10 or more employees, end 

average salary of director, in selected State agencies.. 3 

5. Monthly salaries of directors, by size of local office 

staff. 9 

6. Distribtition of supervisors* salaries...... 13 


O 


< 


r 

r 




















Table 


Page 


7. Distrib\;tion of 25 agencies by e.verage (median) salary 

of super'/iv‘;crE. 13 

8. Distribution of 25 agencies by interc|usrtile range in 

supervisors* salaries. 14 

9. Comparison of salaries of supervisors and visitors in 

selected cities. 15 

10. Average (median) sala.rj’- of supervisors in high and low- 

income States. .... 16 

11. Average number of visitors per supervisor and average 

fciedian) salary for supervisors in 25 agencies.. 16 

12. Distribution of visitors* salaries. 17 

13* Distribution of 4S agencies by average (median) salary of 

visitors....»... •. *...... • 19 

14. Distribution of 4S agencies by interquartile range in 

visitors* salaries........ 20 

15. Distribution of 41 offices serving cities of 250,000 or 

more population by average (median) salary of 

visitors...... 21 

16. Distribution of 45 a..gencies by amoimt of difference 

between average (median) salary of visitors and of 

clerks. 22 

17. Average (median) saltiry of visitors in agencies classified 

by proportion of large offices and per capita income 

of State.. 24 

18. Comparison of average (medicn) salary of visitors in 

large-city offices and all other offices in the same 

State agency. 26 

19. Distribution of clerical workers’ salaries. 27 

20. Distribution of 45 agencies by average (medicn) salary 

of clerical workers. . 29 

21. Distribution of 45 agencies by interquartile range in 

clerical v.'orkers* salaries. 30 

22. Distribution of 40 offices serving cities of 250,000 or 

more by average (median) salary of clerical workers.... 31 


















Table 


Page 


23* Percentage distribution of salaries, by class of worker...# 32 

24» Number of agencies with specified average (median) salary, 

by class of worker...34 

25* Relative position of large-office agencies with respect to 
average (median) salary for all agencies combined, by 
class of worker. . 35 

26. Relative position of small-office agencies with respect to 

average (median) salary for all agencies combined, by 
class of worker.... 36 

27. Distribution of field representatives' salaries............ 37 

28. Distribution of I4 agencies by average (median) salary of 

field representatives... 38 

29. Distribution of I4 agencies by interquartile range in 

field representatives' salaries. 38 

Appendix Table 

I. Distribution of local offices, by State and number of full¬ 
time employees, for a pay-roll period ended December 31, 
1945-April 30, 1946. 44 

II. Distribution of directors in local public assistance 

agencies, by State and amoiant of monthly salary, for a 
pay-roll period ended December 31> 1945~April 30, 1946.. 46 

III. Distribution of supervisors in local public assistance 

agencies, by State and amount of monthly salary, for a 
pay-roll period ended December 31, 1945-April 30, 1946.. 4^ 

IV. Distribution pf visitors in local public assistance agencies, 
by State and amount of monthly salary, for a pay-roll 
period ended December 31, 1945-April 30, 1946.. 50 

V. Distribution of clerks in local public assistance agencies, 
by State and amount of monthly salary, for a pay-roll 
period ended December 31, 1945-April 30, 1946.. 52 

VI. Distribution of supervisors in local public assistance 
offices serving cities of 250,000 or more population, 
by State and amount of monthly salary, for a pay-roll 
period ended December 31, 1945-April 30, 1946.....•••... 54 












Appendix Table Page 

VII. Distribution of visitors in local public assistance 

offices serving cities of 250,000 or more population, 
by State and amount of monthly salary, for a pay-roll 
period ended December 31, 1945-April 30, 1946. 56 

VIII. Distribution of clerks in local public assistance offices 
serving cities of 250,000 or more population, by 
State and amount of monthly salary, for a pay-roll 
period ended December 31, 1945-April 30, 1946. 58 

IX. Distribution of field representatives in State public 
assistance agencies, by State and amount of monthly 
salary, for a pay-roll period ended December 31, 

1945-April 30, 1946. 60 

CHAKTS 

Chart Page 

1. Directors: Average (median) salary, 38 agencies.. 5 

Supervisors: Average (median) salary, 25 agencies. 12 

3. Visitors: Average (median) salary, 48 agencies*... 18 

4* Clerks: Average (median) salary, 45 agencies......... 28 

* 5. Percentage distribution and interquartile range of 

salaries, by class of worker. 33 










INTRODUCTION 


The personnel of local public assistance offices carry on the day 
to day administration of public assistance and other welfare programs. 
Their work is of decisive importance in determining irtiether these pro¬ 
grams meet the needs of the individuals they are designed to serve* The 
staff of the local office must give concrete expression to the laws of 
the Nation and of the State as they affect particular individuals in 
particular circumstances. Satisfactory perfoimance of this difficult 
task demands a basic understanding of people and of the objectives of 
social legislation. 

Recognition of the importance of the function of the local office 
in the euiministration of public assistance and of the need to pay salaries 
that will attract and hold coi^petent workers in these offices led the 
Bureau of Public Assistance to undertake an inquiry into the salaries 
being paid local office personnel of State public assistance agencies 
early in the calendar year 1946. The State public assistance agencies in 
47 States fldilch cooperated with the Bureau in conducting this inquiry 
si:q>pliod information on the salaries paid upwards of 30,000 full-time 
employees in about 3>000 loceil offices.]/ These employees represent 
approximately three-fourths of all personnel in local offices of State 
public assistance agencies. State agencies also reported the monthly 
salaries paid their field representatives idio supervise local offices 
with respect to general administration, the determination of eligibility, 
and the provision of assistance and service. 

Part I of this report presents a summary and analysis of the salary 
information obtained in the inquiry. In addition to salary information, 
the study yielded data about the number of local offices and the size and 
composition of local office staffs. This information, which has hitherto 
not been available in summary form, is summarized in Part II. 

Biroughout this report, the terms "agency** or "State agency" are 
used to refer to the single State agency responsible for administering 
assistance or for supervising the administration of assistance by local 
agencies. The term "local office" as used in this report refers to both 
the local offices of a State agency idiich administers assistance and the 
local agencies which administer assistance under the supervision of a 
State agency. For purposes of this study the District of Columbia was 
considered to be a local office serving a city of 250,000 or more popu¬ 
lation. Including the District of Columbia, the number of agencies 


9 

1/ See appendix table I for detail on State agencies participating in 
the study. Agencies in Alaska, Hawaii, Massachusetts, and Oklahoma 
did not participate. For information on types of local office 
personnel for which salary information was not requested, see 
appendix A. 


- 1 - 




participating in the study was 49;^ for the States having more ttian 
one State agency included in the study, the programs for idiich each is 
responsible are indicated by the letter A for old-age assistance, B 
for aid to the blind, C for aid to dependent children, and G for 
general assistance. 

Of the 30,600 local office employees whose monthly salaries were 
reported, almost half were visitors* These are the staff members who are 
immediately responsible for working with individuals to determine their 
need for assistance or other welfare services* Clerical workers comprised 
almost two-fifths of local office employees. The others were either 
directors or director—workers, who are the administrative heads of local 
offices, and supervisors, who supervise the activities of visitors* The 
number of workers in each of these four major classes was as follpws: 


■Cla..aa 1 / 

Number 

Percent 

Total. 

. 2 / 30,631 

100*0 

Director*.. 

. 2,491 

S*1 

Supervisor*•••*••• 

. 1,675 

5.5 

Visitor. 

. U,830 

4B*4 

Clerk.. 

. U,635 

38.0 


For definition of each type of worker, see 
appendix B. 

^ For detail on types of local office per- 
' sonnel not included, see appendix A* 

Though local offices with 10 or more full-time employees repre¬ 
sent only about a fifth of all local offices, they employ almost three- 
fourths of the local office personnel* Except for directors, therefore, 
the great majority of workers whose salaries were reported represent 
personnel of these larger offices* 

The salary information has been summarized and analyzed 
separately for each class of worker* Evaluation of the salaries paid 
iio employees in a particular State agency as "high” or “low” is 
necessarily based on comparisons with salaries paid to workers in similar 
jx/sitions in other State agencies* These comparisons are subject to 
certain qualifications that must be considered in interpreting the data. 

In the first place, the comparisons are based on broad groupings of 
workers* To some extent within each class, and to a considerable extent 
within the class of director, differences in the duties performed may 
account for part of the differences in salaries paid* Secondly, variations 
•'r.'ug agencies in the length of service of employees may account for some 


In addition, salary data were reported for visitors working out of the 
State office of the Delaware Old Age Welfare Commission; no local 
offices are maintained* 


- 2 - 














salary differences. Thus, agencies paying comparatively high salaries 
may have experienced less turn-over and may have relatively more personnel 
whose periods of service entitle them to maximum rates of pay. Since the 
age of the agency itself is also a factor in determining length of service, 
other things being equal, older agencies might be expected to have more 
employees at maximum rates of pay than those more recently established. 

In interpreting the data, consideration should also be given to 
the fact that salaries that appear to be relatively high on this limited 
basis of evaluation may actually be inadequate in relation to the salaries 
paid for comparable jobs in other fields of work, to the qualifications re¬ 
quired for the job, or to the coat of living. Moreover, use of salary 
data alone as the measure of the economic value of a particular position 
omits from consideration conditions of employment other than salary. 

Though salary is undoubtedly the deciding factor, most workers in their 
choice of a position are influenced to some extent by the hours of work, 
opportunities for promotion, and provisions for vacation and sick leave, 
security of tenure, retirement, and compensation for overtime. Infor¬ 
mation on hours of work in locaJL offices was collected as part of the 
studyi but analysis of the data did not reveal any consistent relation¬ 
ship between the number of hours worked and salaries paid.^ 

State agencies were requested to report monthly salaries for a 
pay-roll period ended betv;een December 31, 1945, April 30, 194^. 

For 28 agencies, the information was taken from the December pay roll and 
for the remaining 21 agencies, from a pay roll for a month early in 1946 .^ 
Since the date of this inquiry, a number of agencies have made upward 
adjustirsents in salaries. The procedures for granting salary Increases 
are so varied that no estimate of their effect on the distribution of 
salaries could be attempted even if complete information were available 
on the changes that have taken place. For example, some agencies In¬ 
creased salaries for an unspecified period, others, for only a temporary 
period; in some agencies, ell salaries were increased, in others, only 
those of selected classes of workers; some agencies granted "bonuses” 
to help employees meet -the rise in cost of living, others gave percentage 
increases, and still others raised salaries by a flat amount per T^eek, 
month, or year. 

The average used in comparisons is the medien, that is, the 
middle salary for each group when all salaries v/ithln the group are 
arranged in order of size. 


y For State detail on hours of work, see appendix C. 

4 / For State detail on month for which data were reported, see appendix D. 


- 3 - 







Dlf^XJTORS 


Monthly salaries were reported for 2,491 directors of local public 
assistance offices. The class of directors includes the resjponsible head 
of each local office, regardless of the size of the office or the title 
of the position—such as commissioner, superintendent, secretary, director, 
or director-worker—in a particular State or locality. Salaries reported, 
therefore, include at one extreme those paid to the responsible heads of 
large metropolitan offices staffed ttith hundreds of workers end at the 
other, salaries paid to individuals who work alone or direct only the 
activities of a single clerk. 

Average (Median) Salary and Range in Directors* Salaries 

For the 2,491 directors, the average (medien) salary was 1^185. At 
the extremes were 1 percent at less than |;120 and 1 percent at $3^0 or 
more. Salaries of the middle half fell between $165 and ^>230.^ Table 1 
shows the heavy concentration of salaries in the lower amounts and the 
small proportion included in the wide range above 1240. As will be shown 
later, size of staff more than any other factor influences the amount of 
a director's salary. This distribution therefore undoubtedly reflects the 
fact that 80 percent of the local offices had less than 10 full-time 
employees. 


Table 1.—Distribution of directors* salaries 


Monthly 

salary 

Number 

Percent 

Total. 

2,491 

100.0 

Less than $120 . 

33 

1.3 

120 - 139.99 . 

253 

10.2 

UO - 159.99 . 

315 

12.6 

160 - 179.99 . 

473 

19.0 

180 - 199 . 99 ..;. 

422 

16.9 

200 - 219.99 . 

357 

14.3 

220 - 239.99 . 

268 

10.8 

240 - 259.99 . 

154 

6.2 

260 - 279.99 . 

59 

2.4 

280 - 299.99 .. 

28 

1.1 

300 - 319.99 . 

57 

2.3 

320 - 339.99 . 

24 

1.0 

340 - 359.99 . 

13 

.5 

360 - 379.99 . 

10 

.4 

380 or more........ 

25 

1.0 


^ Appendix table II shows the distribution of salaries paid full-tiffie 
directors by ^10 and |20 intervals for 47 agencies and the median and 
first and third quartiles for 38 agencies with 10 or more directors. 


- 4 - 






























CHART I. 

DIRECTORS: AVERAGE (MEDIAN) SALARY. 38 AGENCIES 

DOLLARS 

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 

N.J.(AB) 

PA. 

WASH. 

ARIZ. 

CALIF. 

FLA. 

ILL. 

LA. 

MD. 

MICH. 

N.J.(C) 

TEX. 

WIS. 

MINN. 

N.C. 

OREG. 

IDAHO 
IOWA 
UTAH 
ALA. 

KANS. 

OHIO (A) 

S. DAK. 

WYO. 

IND. 

MO. 

MONT. 

NEBR. 

N.MEX. 

N. DAK. 

VA. 

COLO. 

S.C. 

OHIO (BCG) 

TENN. 

MISS. 

ARK. 

GA. 






























































Interstate comparisons of the average salary and the range in 
amounts paid directors reveal marked dissimilarities among agencies* 
Though the average (median) salary for all States combined was $185> 
among State agencies the average varied from a low of $135 to a high of 
$290 with a clustering at $175 and at $230 (table 2 and chart 1)* 

Table 2*—Distribution of 38 agencies by average 
(median) salary of directors 


Average 

(median) 

salary 

Niunber 

of 

agencies 

State agency 

$135 . 

2 

Ark., Ga. 

U5. 

1 

Miss. 

155 .. 

2 

Ohio (BCG), Tenn. 

165 . 

2 

Colo•, S.C. 

175. 

7 

Ind., Mo., Mont., Nebr., 

N.Mex., N.Dak., Va. 

185. 

5 

Aln*^ Kans., Ohio(A), S.Dak., 
Wyo. 

195 . 

3 

Idaho, Iowa, Utah 

210. 

3 

Minn., N.C., Oreg. 

230 . 

8 

Fla., Ill., La., Md., Mich., 
N.J.(C), Tex., Wis. 

240 . 

1 

Calif. 

250 . 

1 

Ariz. 

270. 

1 

Wash. 

290 . 

2 

N.J.(AB), Pa. 


In 3 agencies—Arkansas, New Hampshire, and South Carolina—all 
directors received salaries below the national average of $185; in 
Mississippi, only one of the 81 directors received as much as this average. 
On the other hand, all directors in 11 States received salaries in excess 
of the national average as follows: 


State Number of Type of 

agency directors office 


Arizona... 

Connecticut...... 

Florida.. 

Maine•..••••••••• 

Maryland.. 

Michigan..•.••••• 
Nevada.•«.*••.•.• 

New Jersey (AB).. 

(C)... 

Pennsylvania. 

Washington. 

West Virginia.,.. 


U 

Comty 

4 

District 

11 

District 

9 

District 

21 

County 

81 

County 

2 

District 

15 

County 

13 

District 

66 

County 

25 

County 

8 

District 


- 6 - 
































Some agencies paid almost the same salaries to all directors; 
others paid salaries covering a wide range in amounts. For example, in 
South Carolina, the middle half of the salaries fell within the same |10 
class interval. In California, however, the middle half included amounts 
from $210 to $330, a spread extending over 13 class intervals of $10. The 
interquartile range in salaries, which provides a crude measure of the 
spread in salaries, is shown by State in table 3. 

Table 3*—Distribution of 3^ agencies by interquartile 
range in directors* salaries 


Interquartile 

range 

Number of 
agencies 

State agency 

$0. 

2 

S.C., Tex. 

10.. 

5 

Ala., Ark., Miss., S.Dak., Tenn. 

20. 

6 

Fla., Ill., La., Mo., N.J.(C), 
Ohio( a) 

. 

3 

Idaho, Iowa, Utah 

30. 

6 

Colo., Ga., Ksns., Mont., Nebr., 
N.Mex. 

35. 

1 

V/yo. 

40. 

4 

Ariz., Mich., Ohio (BCG), 

Oreg. 

45. 

4 

Ind., Minn., N.Dak., Va. 

55. 

3 

Md., N.G., Wis. 

80. 

3 

N.J.(AB), Pa., Wash. 

120. 

1 

Celif. 


Factors Affecting Directors* Salaries 


The analysis which follows indicates that size of staff influences 
the salary paid a director more than any other factor or combination of 
factors. Size of staff, however, is related to size of case load, which 
in turn is determined to a considerable extent by the number of persons in 
the community served by the local office. In the last analysis it is 
probably the size of the community and the salaries paid the responsible 
heads of other local govemmenteil departments in the same community that 
Influence the salary paid the director of a local office. Intrastate 
differences in salaries paid directors are attributable almost entirely 
to differences in size of staff, since the directors in the larger offices 
in most States usually receive higher salaries than other directors in 
the same State. Though other factors may also account for intrastate 
differences, the influence of size of staff is so overwhelming as to 
obscure their effect. 


- 7 - 





















Similarly, the extent to which interstate differences in directors* 
salaries may be attributable to factors other than size of staff is diffi¬ 
cult to determine. States v/ith relatively high fiscal ability might be 
expected to pay better salaries. The data indicate, however, that what¬ 
ever effect fiscal ability may have on directors* salaries, it is sub¬ 
ordinate to the effect of size of staff. Agencies in 15 States, including 
6 States with below-average per capita income, had a relatively large 
proportion of large offices (table 4)* In all but 4 of these agencies 
the average salary of directors was substantially above the average of 
^185 for the country as a whole; 2 of the 4—Indiana and Ohio (A), with 
averages of only $175 and $185, respectively—v/ere in high-income States. 

Among the 22 "small-office” agencies, including 4 in States with 
above-average per capita income, 7 had an average salary for director 
above the national average. Two of these 7 States—Oregon and V/isconsin— 
were above average in per capita income, and 5—Idaho, Iowa, Minnesota, 
North Carolina, and Utah—were below average. 

Table 4*—Number of offices, number with 10 or more employees, and 
average salary of director, in selected Sta.te agencies 1/ 


State 

agency 

Number of offices 

Average (median) 
salary of 
director 

Total 

10 or more 
employees 


States with above-average per capita income tJ 

Calif omia....... 

53 

26 

1240 

Illinois. 

102 

37 

230 

Indiana.. 

92 

24 

175 

Maryland......... 

24 

11 

230 

Michigan.. 

83 

22 

230 

New Jersey(A3)... 

21 

16 

290 

(C).... 

13 

13 

230 

Ohio(A). 

88 

27 

185 

Pennsylvania. 

67 

50 

290 

Washington. 

39 

20 

270 


States with below-average per capita income TJ 

Arizona. 

U 

4 

250 

Colorado 

63 

13 

165 

Florida. 

12 

12 

230 

Louisiana. 

61 

26 

230 

South Carolina... 

46 

10 

165 

Texas. 

40 

33 

230 


1/ Agencies in which at least one-fifth of the local offices employ 10 
or more workers. 

tJ On basis of income data for 1945. 


- 8 - 




































Table 5.—Montlily salaries of directors, by size of local office staff 


Montlily 
salary and 
que.rtile 

All 

directors 

Number of full-time employees of office 

Director 

only 

2-4 

5-9 

10-19 

20 or 
more 


Number of directors 


Total 1/ 

2,474 

159 

1,U5 

664 

324 

182 

Monthly salary: 







Less than ^120.. 

33 

16 

17 

0 

0 

0 

120-129.99. 

58 

15 

43 

0 

0 

0 

130-139.99. 

195 

47 

134 

13 

1 

0 

U0-U9.99. 

112 

U 

77 

21 

0 

0 

150-159.99. 

203 

28 

151 

24 

0 

0 

160-169.99. 

209 

14 

119 

65 

10 

1 

170-179.99...... 

263 

16 

146 

87 

12 

2 

180-139.99. 

247 

7 

169 

59 

12 

0 

190-199.99. 

171 

0 

85 

65 

20 

1 

200-219.99. 

353 

1 

159 

130 

49 

u 

220-239.99...... 

262 

1 

35 

115 

97 

u 

240-259.99. 

153 

0 

8 

63 

59 

23 

260-279.99. 

58 

0 

1 

7 

25 

25 

230-299.99. 

23 

0 

0 

^ i 

1 ^'7 

7 

300 or more. 

129 

0 

1 

11 

22 

95 


Monthly salary of directors 

Quartile: 







First quartile.. 

fpl65 

$135 

$155 

$175 ^ 

. $210 

$250 

Median... 

185 

U5 

175 

195 i 

: 230 

310 

Third quartile.. 

230 

155 

19-5 

230 I 

1 250 

330 


1/ Excludes 17 directors of child welfare offices—2 in Maine and 15 
in Texas. 


The findings of this study do not indicate that directors of local 
offices administering several assistance programs, or welfare programs in 
addition to the assistance programs, receive higher salaries than those 
administering a smaller number of programs. Differences in the degree of 
supervision exercised by State agencies over the appointment of local 
office personnel or in the extent of local financial participation in 
salaries may account in part for interagency differences in the average 
salaries for directors or in the range of salaries paid. Because of the 
predominant effect of size of office it is impossible to determine the 


- 9 - 


























































Influence of these two factors* For other classes of workers, however, 
these factors do not appear to be of major importance in accounting for 
interagency differences in average salaries or in the range of seilaries 
paid. 


The high degree of correlation between number of employees and 
directors! salaries for all States combined is shown in table 5» All of 
the 91 directors receiving less than |130 a month were in charge of 
offices with less than 5 employees; on the other hand, all but 1 of the 
129 directors with salaries of |300 or more directed offices with 5 or 
more employees. Only 35 percent of the directors in offices with less 
than 20 employees were paid $200 or more; 93 percent of the directors in 
these larger offices received such salaries. The median salary is pro¬ 
gressively higher as the size of the staff increases—from $145 for 
offices with the director as the only full-time worker to $310 for the 
182 offices staffed with at least 20 employees. 


- 10 - 


SUPERVISORS 


Both the number of supervisore and the number of local offices 
which employ such personnel are relatively small, Only 1,675 
employees were supervisors; they comprised less than 6 percent of all 
local office personnel and less than 9 percent of local office personnel 
other than clerks. The 440 offices to which they were attached represented 
only 15 percent of all off ices.V For purposes of this study the class 
of supervisor ?ras defined to include only employees whose major fiinction 
is the supervision of either visitors or supervisors of visitors. To the 
extent, therefore, that supervision is provided in local agencies by 
personnel, such as county directors or senior case workers, whose major 
function is the performance of other duties, these data understate the 
amount of supervision provided in local offices. 

Most supervisors work in large offices. Over half were attached 
to offices with 100 or, more employees and about one-fifth to offices of 
less than 25 employees. As a result, supervisory I'erscnnel is heavily 
concentrated in the States with large offices. About 1,000, or three- 
fifths, were employed in the five States with the largest numbers of 
supervisors—California, Illinois, New York, Pennsylvania, and Washington; 
New York alone employed 469* Three States—Connecticut, Florida, West 
Virginia—which Fire organized on a district basis had supervisors in all 
local offices. At the other extreme were nine States 7/ with no super¬ 
visory staff employed in any of their 353 local offices, the majority of 
which are small county offices in rural areas. 

Average (Median) Salary and Range in Supervisors* Salaries 

For the country as a whole, salaries of supervisors generally are 
higher and more nearly uniform than those paid directors or visitors. 

The median salary of |210 for supervisors is considerably above the 
medians of $185 for directors and $165 for visitors. The higher average 
salary for supervisor than for director is accounted for by the fact that 
the average for director is heavily weighted by the lower salaries paid 
directors of small offices. Within the same office the director’s salary 
was always higher than the supervisors’. The interquartile range of $35 
for supervisors, which includes the middle half of their salaries, shows 
considerably less spread than the $65 and $50 ranges for directors and 
visitors, respectively. Salaries of the middle half fell between $195 
and $230.^ Extremes included 1 percent below $160 and 2 percent at $320 
or more (table 6). 


^ The number of offices with supeivisors is shown, by State, in appendix E. 

7/ Idaho, Miss., Mont., Nev., N.Dak., S.Dak., Tex., Vt., Wyo. 

^ Appendix table III shows the distribution of salaries paid full-time 
supervisors by $10 and $20 intervals for 40 agencies and the median 
and first and third quartiles for 25 agencies with 10 or more super¬ 
visors. 


- 11 - 






CHART 2. 

SUPERVISORS: AVERAGE (MEDIAN) SALARY. 25 AGENCIES 


DOLLARS 


0 50 , 100 150 200 


MICH. 

WASH. 

ILL. 

MINN. 

N.Y. 

UTAH 

CALIF. 

KANS. 

LA. 

MD. 

N. J. (AB) 
OHIO (BCG) 
* OREG. 

PA. 

R.l. 

VA. 

FLA. 

MAINE 

MO. 

N.J. (C) 
OHIO (A) 
COLO. . 
N.C. 



GA. 





























































Table 6*—Diatribution of supervisors* salaries 


Monthly 

salary 

Number 

Percent 

Total. 

1,675 

100.0 

Less than $160.«**» 

23 

1.4 

160-179.99. 

134 

8.0 

180-199.99. 

328 

19.6 

200-219.99. 

449 

26.8 

220-239.99. 

414 

24.7 

240-259.99.. 

172 

10.3 

260-279.99. 

50 

3.0 

280-299.99. 

19 

1.1 

300-319.99. 

61 

3.6 

320 or more*••••••• 

25 

1.5 


Among agencies, the average salary for supervisors varied from 
a loT/ of |185 to a high of $250, with a bunching at $210 (table 7 and_ 
chart 2), Differences in the uniformity of salaries within each agency, 
roughly measured by the interquartile range, are shown in table 8, 


Table 7*—^Distribution of 25 agencies by average 
(median) salary of supervisors 


Average 

(median) 

salary 

Number 

of 

agencies 

State 

agency 

$185. 

2 

Ga., Ind. 

190. 

2 

Colo., N.C* 

195. 

5 

Fla., Maine, Mo., 
N.J.(C), Ohio(A) 

210. 

10 

CalifKans., La., 
Md., N.J.(AB), 

Ohio(BCG), Oreg., 
Pa., ft.Xa, Va. 

230. 

4 

Ill., Minn., N.Y., 
Utah 

250. 

2 

Mich., T/ash. 


- 13 - 
































Table 8.—Distribution of 25 agencies by interquartile 
range in supervisors* salaries 


Interquartile 

range 

Number of 
agencies 

State agency 

$0. 

1 

N.J.(C) 

10... 

2 

Colo,, Maine 

15. 

1 

Kans. 

20. 

7 

Calif., Minn., N.I., N.G., 
Orsg., Utah, Wash. 

25. 

4 

iMo., Ohio(A), lUI., Va. 

35. 

6 

i Fla., Ga., Ill., Ind., 

Ohio(BCG), Pa. 

40. 

2 

Md., Mich. 

45. 

1 

La. 

55. 

1 

N.J.(AB) 


Comparison with Visitors* Salaries 


Although supervisors* salaries in general are considerably higher 
than those paid visitors, many supervisors receive monthly amounts no 
higher than some visitors in the same office. Over half the supervisors 
whose salaries were reported worked in 39 offices serving areas that in¬ 
clude a city of 250,000 or more. Almost three-fourths of these 39 offices 
reported salaries for some supervisors no higher than that paid at least 
one visitor on the staff.^/ In most of these offices the numbers of 
supervisors and visitors whose salaries were comparable were small. In 
the offices in Buffalo, Los Angeles, Minneapolis, and New York City, how¬ 
ever, the extent of overlapping in salaries paid workers in the two 
classifications was greater than in other large offices. As shown in 
table 9> both the proportion of supervisors Y^ose salaries were equaled 
by some visitors and the proportion of visitors paid at rates comparable 
to those for supervisors were relatively large in these four cities. 


2/ Appendix table VT shows the distribution of salaries paid supervisors 
by $10 and $20 intervals for 39 local offices serving areas that 
include cities of 250,000 or more population, and the median and 
first and third quartiles for 16 offices with 10 or more supervisors. 
Appendix table VII shows similar data for visitors. 


- U - 




















Table 9Comparison of salaries of supervisors and 
visitors in selected cities 


City 

Supervisors 

Visitors 

Total 

number 

Number 
receiving 
salaries 
no higher 
than those 
paid some 
visitors 

Total 

number 

Number 
receiving 
salaries at 
least as 
high as 
those paid 
some 

supervisors 

Buffalo....... 

33 

22 

183 

76 

Los Angeles... 

83 

81 

553 

287 

Minneapolis... 

20 

15 

113 

62 

New York. 

272 

233 

1,365 

1,720 


Factors Affecting Supervisors* Salaries 

Differences in fiscal ability among States to some extent may- 
account for interstate differences in supervisors* salaries. Agencies 
in States with above-average per capita income tend -bo pay higher 
salaries than those in other S-bates, Thus 11 of the 14 agencies in 
high-income States had average salaries at or above the median of $210 
for all States. In contrast, the average salary for supervisors was 
at or above the national average in only 5 of the 11 agencies in low- 
income States (table 10). The influence of factors other than fiscal 
ability is indicated by the fact that in New Jersey and Ohio, which 
have two sets of local offices, tlie average salary for supemdsors in 
one set of local offices is at the nationel average, and in the other 
it is below. 

The findings of this study indicate that differences in the average 
number of visitors supervised do not account for interagency differences 
in supervisors* salaries. On -the average, the 440 offices to which super¬ 
visors were attached had 6 visitors per supervisor. Among the 10 agencies 
with a median salary equaJ. to the national median of $210, supervisors had 
on the average from 4 to 8 visitors under their supervision. In the Ohio 
Division of Aid to the Aged, Tibich has the largest number of visitors per 
supervisor, the average salary was only $195* On the other hand, among 
the 3 agencies averaging less than 5 visitors per supervisor, the 
median salary \:as $210 in the Ohio Division of Social Administration and 
$230 in Minnesota end Utah. Table 11 shows the average number of visitors 
per supervisor and the median sedary for supervisors in -bhe 25 agencies 
employing 10 or more supervisors. 


- 15 - 













Table lO,—Average (median)'salary of supervisors in 
high and low-income States 1/ 


State 

agency 

Average 

(median) 

salary 

State 

agency 

Average 

(median) 

salary 

States with above- 


States with below- 


average per capita 


average per capita 


income: 


income: 


r.nl 1 f'rvm^ n. 

1210 

Colorado•••••••••••• 

vl90 

T1 1 iTlnl R. 

230 

Florida............. 

195 

TnHiRnn 

185 

Georgia............. 

185 

IrtfiT^irT finr^ _____ 

210 

Kansas 

210 

rh"! crfl.n............ 

250 

Loui siana••••••••••• 

210 

Naw .Tai*aavi tlR I . ^ ^ 

210 

Maine••••«•••••••••• 

195 

fc). 

195 

Minnesota..•••••••«• 

230 

TJpw Vr^TV 

230 

Missouri............ 

195 

Ohlo(A)............. 

195 

North Carolina.• 

190 

rpcG). 

210 

Utah................ 

230 

Oreg<^n 

210 

Virginia............ 

210 

Pennsylvania•••••••• 

210 



Bhode Inland.. 

210 



Washington. • ... 

250 




i/ On the basis of income data for 1945. 


Table 11,—Average'number of visitors per supervisor and average 
(median) salary for supervisors in 25 agencies 


Less than 6 visitors 

6 visitors 

More tlian 6 visitors 

State 

agency 

Visitors 

per 

super¬ 

visor 

Average 

(median) 

salary 

State 

agency 

Average 

(median) 

salary 

State 

agency 

Visitors 

per 

super¬ 

visor 

Average 

(median) 

salary 

Ga. 

5 

^185 

Calif.. 

$210 

Ind.... 

7 

1185 

Mo. 

5 

195 

Colo..• 

190 

N.C_ 

7 

190 

La. 

5 

210 

Kans... 

210 

Fla.... 

8 

195 

Ud. 

5 

210 

Ra.... 

210 

Maine.• 

7 

195 

N.J.(AB) 

5 

210 

Va. 

210 

N.J.(C) 

9 

195 

Ohio(ECG) 

4 

210 

Ill.... 

230 

Ohio(A) 

10 

195 

Pa. 

5 

210 

N.Y.... 

230 

Oreg... 

8 

210 

Minn.••• 

4 

230 

Mich... 

250 




Utah.•.• 

4 

230 






Wa sh•.• • 

5 

250 







- 16 - 























































VISITORS 


The 14,^30 visiters whose salaries were reported comprised almost 
half the local office employees. About three-fourths of the offices 
employed one or more full-time visitors. Only the very small offices had 
no fiill-time visitors; in these offices either an employee classified as 
director or a part-time visitor performed the functions usually assigned 
to visitors. More than 3>000, or a fifth of all visitors, worked in 
Hew York State. 

Average (Median) Salary and Range in Visitors* Salaries 

For the country as a whole, wide differences exist in the salaries 
paid visitors. These differences are revealed by the considerable pro¬ 
portion of salaries falling in each class interval between |120 and $220 
and by the fact that 4 percent were at the extremes below or above these 
amounts (table 12). The average (median) salary was $165 with the middle 
half falling between |145 and 1195.10/ 

Table 12.—Distribution of visitors» salaries 


Monthly 

salary 

Number 

Percent 

Total. 

14.830 

100.0 

Less than $120...•• 

450 

3.0 

120-139.99. 

2,570 

17.3 

140-159.99. 

3,895 

26.3 

160-179.99. 

3,414 

23.0 

180-199.99. 

2,163 

14.6 

200-219.99. 

2,160 

14.6 

220 or more.... 

178 

1.2 


The average (median) sala^ of $165 for all visitors is higher 
than the average in almost two-thirds of the agencies. This situation 
results from the relatively high salaries paid in New York State and the 
large proportion of all visitors employed in that State. For this reason 
the average (median) salary in the median agency—$ 155 —has been used as 
a more valid measure of central tendency for purposes of interagency corn- 
prison. As shown in table 13 and chart 3> the leirgest single group of 
agencies—11—had an average of $155; in another 10, the average was $135 • 
The highest average ($210 in New York) exceeded the lowest ($115 in 
Arkansas and Mississippi) by more than 80 percent. 


10/ Appendix table IV shows the distribution of salaries paid visitors by 
$10 and $20 intervals for 50 agencies and the median and first and 
third quartiles for the 49 agencies with 10 or more visitors. 


- 17 - 





















CHART 3. 

VISITORS: AVERAGE (MEDIAN) SALARY, 48 AGENCIES 


DOLLARS 


0 50 100 150 200 250 


N.Y. 

MICH. 

NEV. 

TEX. 

WASH. 

ARIZ. 

CALIF. 

ILL. 

MINN. 

S. DAK. 

VT. 

DEL. (A) 
FLA. 

IDAHO 

UTAH 

WYO. 

KANS. 

KY. 

MAINE 
N.J. (AB) 
N.J. (C) 
OHIO (A) 
OHIO (BCG) 
OREG. 

PA. 

W.VA. 

WIS. 

N. DAK. 
IND. 

IOWA 

LA. 

MD. 

MONT. 

R. l. 

ALA. 

COLO. 

CONN. 

MO. 

NEBR. 

N. MEX. 
N.C. 

S. C. 
TENN. 

VA. 

GA. 

N. H. 

ARK. 

MISS. 





- 18 - 









































































Table 13.—Distribution of 48 agencies by average 
(median) salary of visitors 


Average 

(median) 

salary 

Number 

of 

agencies 

State agency 

tU5. 

2 

Ark., Miss. 

125. 

2 

Ga., N.H. 

135 . 

10 

Ala., Colo., Conn., Mo., Nebr., 
N.Mex., N.C., S.C., Tenn., Va. 

U5. 

6 

Ind., Iowa, La., Md., Mont., 

R.I. 

150 . 

1 

N.Dak. 

155 . 

11 

Kans., Ky., Maine, N.J.(AB), 
N.J.(C), Ohio(A), Ohio(BCG), 
Oreg., Pa., W.Va., Wis. 

165. 

5 

Fla., Idaho, Del.(A), Utah, Wyo. 

175. 

5 

Calif., Ill., Minn., S.Dak., Vt. 

185. 

1 

Ariz. 

195. 

4 

Mich., Nev., Tex., Wash. 

210. 

1 

-i 

N.Y. 


All visitors in five States—Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, Texas, and 
Washington—^were paid at a rate above the average of $155. At the other 
extreme , all visitors in four southern States—^Arkansas, Georgia, 
liississippi, and South Carolina—received less than this amount. 

Though interagency differences in salaries paid visitors were 
considerable, variations in salary among visitors in the same agency were 
not so great. In about two-thirds of the agencies, the middle half of 
salaries in each agenpy fell within a range of $20 or less (table 14). 

Of the three agencies in which the middle half of salaries fell within a 
single $10 class inteirval, only Kentucky had a uniform salary for all 
visitors. At the time a revised pay scale for visitors was adopted in 
this State, salaries of all visitors were raised to the bottom of the 
new range. 


- 19 - 




















Table 14.—Distribution of 48 agencies by interquartile 
range in visitors* salaries 


Interquartile 

range 

Number of 
agencies 

State agency 

$0. 

3 

Ky., N.J.(C), Tex. 

10. 

9 

Ala., Ark., Ga., Mich., Mo., 
N.H., S.C., Tenn., TJyo. 

20. 

19 

Del.( a), Idaho, Iowa, La,, 
Maine, Md,, Minn., Miss., 
Nebr., N.Mex,, Ohio(A), 
Oreg., Pa., R.I., S.Dak., 
Utah, Vt., W.Va., Wis. 

25. 

2 

Nev., Wash. 

30 . 

8 

Ariz., Colo., Fla., Ill,, 

Ind., Mont., N.C., Va. 

35. 

1 

Conn. 

40 . 

5 

Calif., Kans., N,J.(AB), 
N.Dak,, Ohio (bCG) 

45. 

1 

N.y. 


For offices serving cities with a population of 250,CXX) or more, 
the average Uediea) salary for all visitors was $185* 11/ Here again, 
the influence of the' higher salaries in New York State is apparent, for 
New York City vdth more than a third of all visitors attached to large- 
city offices had an average salary of $210. The average salary in the 
median office was $165, with 9 offices falling at this average and half 
the remaining offices falling above, and half below $165 (table 15). 

In general, the average (median) salary was relatively high if the 
office was in a State agency with above-average salaries, and it was 
low in other offices* Thus, 22 of the 30 large-city offices in State 
agencies with salaries average or above had hig^ averages, whereas 8 
of the 10 large-city offices in State agencies with below-average 
salaries had low salaries. 


11/ Appendix table VII show^s the distribution of salaries paid visitors 
by $10 and $20 intervals for 48 offices serving areas that include 
cities of 250,000 or more population and the median and first and 
third quartiles for the 41 offices with 10 or more visitors. 


- 20 - 

















Table 15.—Distribution of 41 offices serving cities of 250,000 
or more population by average (median) salary of visitors 

/I signifies a^nistration of old-age assistance; B, aid to the 
blind; C, aid to dependent children; and G, general assistance^ 


Average 
(median) 
salary , 

Number 

of 

offices 

City served 

$125 . 

1 

Denver 

Atlanta, Birmingham, Memphis, 
Providence 

Baltimore, St. Louis 

Cincinnati(G), Cleveland(G), Jersey 
City(AB), Louisville, Nev/ark(C), 

New Orleans, Pittsburgh, Portland 
Cleveland(BG) 

Buffalo, Cincinnati( a), Cleveland(A), 
Columbus(A), Indianapolis, 

Kansas City, Philadelphia, St. Paul, 
Toledo( a) 

Rochester 

Cincinnati(C), Los Angeles, Newark(jiB) 
Chicago, Dallas, Detroit, District 
of Columbia, Houston, Minneapolis, 
San Antonio, Seattle 

Cleveland(C), New York 

Milwaukee(A) and (CB) 

135. 

/ 

145. 

2 

155. 

8 

160 .. 

1 

165 . 

9 

175. 

7 

1 

185 ... 

3 

195 . 

8 

210 . 

2 

230 . 

2 




Comparison with Salaries Paid Clerical Workers 

Visitors* salaries usually exceed those paid clerical workers 
within the same agency. The median salary of tl65 for visitors tos $30 
higher than that for clerks. In two-thirds of the agencies the average 
for visitors was $20 - $30 above the average clerical salary. The re¬ 
maining agencies, however, showed marked variations in the extent to which 
salaries for these two classes differed. Connecticut, for example, had 
the same average salary—$ 135 —for workers in both classifications, whereas 
the average salary for visitors exceeded that for clerks by $70 in South 
Dakota and Texas. Table 16 shows the difference in medians for these two 
classes of workers for each of 45 agencies for which both medians could 
be computed. 


- 21 - 























Table 16.—Distribution of 45 agencies bj amount of 
difference between average (median) salary of 
visitors and of clerks 


Amount 

of 

difference 

Number 

of 

agencies 

State agency 

«0 . 

1 

Conn. 

10 . 

2 

Md., W.Va. 

20 . 

17 

Ala., Colo., Ga., Ind., 

Iowa, La., Miss., Mont., 

N.H., N.Mex., N.C., 

Ohio(ECG), Oreg., S.C., 

Utah, Va., Wash. 

30. 

13 

Ariz., Ark., Calif., Idaho, 
Kans., Mo., Nebr., N.J.(AB), 
Ohio(A), Pa., R.I., Wis., 

Wyo. 

35. 

1 

N.Dak. 

40. 

6 

Ha.,Ill., Maine, Mich., 

N.J.(C), Tenn. 

50. 

2 

Minn., Vt. 

65. 

1 

N.Y. 

70. 

2 

S.Dak., Tex. 


Although visitors* salaries on the average are higher than clerks* 
within the same State agency, 12/ the average salary for visitors in some 
agencies is considerably belo7/ the average for clerks in other agencies. 
Thus, in 27 agencies the average salary for clerks exceeded the average 
for visitors in Arkansas and Mississippi. 13/ Agencies in three States— 
Arizona, Michigan, and Washington—^had average salaries for clerks of 
$155 or more; these were higher than the average for Tisitors in 21 
agencies (table 13 ). 

Interstate Comparison of Salaries Paid Visitors and Teachers 

In the comparison which follows, salaries paid visitors and 
salaries paid elementary and secondary public school teachers in each 
State are considered high or low relative to amounts paid visitors and 
teachers, respectively, in other States. In such a comparison, to say 
a State is relatively hi^ in salaries paid visitors and relatively low 
in salaries paid teachers does not necessarily mean that visitors receive 
more than teachers in that State. The comparison indicates only that the- 
State pays visitors mor% and teachers less, relative to what other States 
pay visitors and teachers, respectively. 



Except for Connecticut. 
See table 20. 


- 22 - 


















The most recent comprehensive inforju'ition on teachers’ salaries 
indicates that 24 States paid 6 percent or more of their teachers less 
than $1,200 in the school year 1945-46. 14/ For purposes of comparison, 
these States were considered as paying ’’low” salaries to teachers. 
Similarly, States in which visitors* salaries averaged less than $155 
were considered as paying ”low” salaries to visitors. As shovm in the 
suoaraary below, salaries of both teachers and visitors were relatively 
”lov/” in 15 States and relatively ’’high” in 16 States. The remaining 
15 States included 9 with ’’high” salaries for visitors and ”low” 
salaries for teachers and 6 States in which teachers fared relatively 
better than visitors. 

States in which salaries are relatively — 


Low for both 
visitors and 
teachers 
(15 States) 

Ala. 

Ark. 

Colo. 

Ga. 

Iowa 
La • 

Miss. 

Mo. 

Nebr. 

N.H. 

N.C. 

N.Dak. 

S.C. 

Tenn. 

Va. 


High for both 
visitors and 
teachers 
(16 States) 

Ariz. 

Calif. 

Del.(A) 

Idaho 

Mich. 

Minn. 

Nev. 

N.J. 

N.Y. 

Ohio 

Oreg. 

Pa. 

Utah 

Wash. 

Wis. 

Wyo. 


High for 
visitors, low 
for teachers 
(9 States) 

Fla. 

Ill. 

Kans. 

Ky. 

Maine 
S. Dak. 
Tex. 

Vt. 

W.Va. 


Low for 
visitors, high 
for teachers 
(6 States) 

Conn. 

Ind. 

Md. 

Mont. 

N.Max. 

R.I. 


Factors Affecting Visitors’ Salaries 


Visitors’ salaries tended to be higher in agencies that have a 
relatively high proportion of large offices and are located in States 
that rank above average in per capita income. Thus the median salary was 
at or above the average in 9 of the 12 agencies that met both these con¬ 
ditions. On the other hand, the median salary was average or above in 
only 8 of the 20 States that are below average in per capita income and 


yj National Education Association, The Continuing Crisis in Sducation. 
October 1946, ?. 9. 


- 23 - 










Table 17.—^Average (median) salary of visitors in agencies 
classified by proportion of large offices and per capita 
Income of State 


Large-office agencies 

Small-office agencies 1/ 

State 

Median salary 

State 

Median salary 

agency 

High 

Low 

agency 

High 

Low 

States with above-ave 

.•age per capita income 


Calif. 

1175 


Mont........ 



Conn....... 

$135 

INev.... 

1195 

Ill. 

175 

Ohio(BCG)... 

155 


Ind. 


Li5 

Oreg-^ f.... . 

155 


Md. 


U5 

Wifi. 

155 


Mich. 

195 

R.I. 

U5 

S.J.Ub)... 

155 




(c).... 

155 





N.T. 

210 





Ohio (A)... 

155 





Pa. 

155 





Wash. 

195 

1 

1 




States with below-average per capita income 


Ariz.. 

^85 


Ala. 


1135 

Colo....... 

1135 

A T'k 


115 

Fla. 

165 

r,a.. 


125 

La. 

U5 

Iriabo ,,^^, 

1165 

Maine...... 

'155 

X OWa 

U5 

N.H. 

125 

Kanp -, . ^ ^ , 

155 

s.c. 


135 

Kv. 

155 


Tex........ 

195 

Minn 

175 


W*Va*•«•••• 

155 


Mififi.. 

115 



Mo. 


135 




Nebr. 


135 




N.Mex. 


135 




N.C.. 


135 




N.Dak. 


150 




S.Dak. 

175 





Tenn. 


135 




Utah. 

165 





Vt.. 

1^5 





Va. 


135 




jWyo.... 

165 



1 / Agencies in idiich at least one-fifth of the local offices 

employ 10 or more workers are classified as large-office agen¬ 
cies; those with less than one-fifth, as small-office agencies. 


- 24 - 












































































have a relatively small proportion of large offices (table 17)# 

Agencies in 11 States, however, bad an average salary that ran con- 
trarj’^ to the pattern set by botli income and size of office, Tliese 
v/ere: 

(1) The large-office agencies in the high-income States of 
Connecticut, Indiana, and Maryland, in v/hich the median 
salary was below average; and 

(2) The small-office agencies in the low-income States of 
Idaho, Kansas, Kentucky, Minnesota, South Dakota, Utah, 

Vermont, and Wyoming, in which the median salary was 
above average. 

Within States, visitors working in offices tliat serve cities with 
a population of 250,000 or more usually received higher sslaries than 
those in other offices in the same agency. In 25 large-city offices, 
the average salary was higher than that for other offices in the same 
agency (table IS) • Twelve large-city offices, however, had the same 
average as the rest of the agency, and 3—^Baltimore, Denver, and Prov¬ 
idence-^had a lower average. Four State agencies—^Minnesota, New York, 

Ohio, and Pennsylvania—included both large-city offices in which the 
average was above, and laxge-city offices in which it was the same as 
that for other offices in the agency. 


The fact that visitors in larger offices usually received higher 
salaries than those in small offices probably does not, as it does in 
the case of directors, represent a significant difference in the content 
of the job or degree of responsibility. Rather, it probably reflects 
the need to pay higher salaries in urban areas where the cost of living 
is higher than elsewhere in the States, 


State agencies in which visitors on the average are responsible 
for a relatively large number of cases do not necessarily pay higher 
salaries. For example, among the 11 agencies with an average (median) 
salary of $155, tiie average number of cases per visitor ranged from 
less than 100 to 267 in December 1945. Though interagency differences 
in salaries apparently are not attributable to differences in case 
loads, it is entirely possible that within agencies visitors who receive 
higher salaries may carry more cases. 


25 - 


Table 18.—Comparieon of average (median) salary of visitors in large- 
city offices and all other offices in the same State agency 



Large-city office 

Average 

(median) 



Percent of all 


State 

City 

visitors in State 

Average 

salary in 

agency 

served 

agency employed 

(median) 

all other 



in specified 

salary 

offices 



office 



AT phfimfl , ^ ^ T ^ 

Birmingham 

Los Angeles 

18.6 

61.6 

$135 

185 

$125 

175 

California... 

Colorado. 

Denver 

29.4 

125 

U5 

Georgia. 

Atlanta 

25.7 

43.5 

135 

195 

125 

175 

Illinois. 

Indiana...... 

Chicago 
Indianapolis 
Louisvil]e 

9.9 

8.6 

165 

155 

145 

155 

Kentucky. 

Louisiana.... 

New Orleans 

21.4 

155 

145 

Maryland. 

Baltimore 

50.4 

145 

155 

Michigan..... 

Detroit 

24.3 

195 

195 

Minnesota.. 

Minneapolis 

St. Paul 

46.5 

195 

165 

165 

Missouri. 

Kansas City 

St. Louis 

38.4 

165 

145 

• 135 

New Jersey... 

Jersey City(AB) 


155 

145 


Newark(AB) 

23.6 

135 


Nev7ark(C) 

27.9 

155 

155 

New lork.r.'., 

Buffalo 


165 



New fork 

68.4 

210 

165 


Rochester 


175 


Ohio. 

Cincinnati( a) 


165 






Cleveland( a) 

26.1 

165 

155. 


Coliunbus(A) 

165 


Toledo(A) 


165 



Cincinnati(C) 


185 



Cincinnati(G) 


155 



Cleveland!C) 

57.4 

210 

155 


Cleveland!G) 


155 


Gleveland(BG) 


160 


Oregon. 

Portland 

51.5 

155 

145 


Pennsylvcinia. 

Philadelphia 

42.9 

I65 

155 

Rhode Island. 

Pittsburgh 

155 

Providence 

50.0 

135 

145 

Tennessee.... 
Texas. 

Memphis 

Dallas 

Houston 

13.2 

135 

195 

195 

125 


17.8 

195 


San Antonio 


195 

Washington... 

Seattle 

26.3 

195 

195 

Wisconsin.,.. 

Milwaukee(A) 

13.1 

230 


Milwaukee(GB) 

230 

155 


- 26 - 


























CLERKS 

Clericel personnel, including secretaries, stenographers, typists, 
file clerks, statistical and accounting clerks, and others engaged in 
similar activities, represented 33 percent of the employees in local 
public assistance offices. Almost 15 percent of the offices had no 
clerical staff. About a fourth of these were in Kentucky, where all 
offices at the time of this inquiry operated without clerical personnel; 
most of the others were one-person offices wiiich usually employ a 
director only. The 2,800 clerical workers in the loccil offices in New 
York represented almost a fourth of all clerical personnel. 

The average (median) monthly salary for the 11,635 clerical 
workers included in the study was $ 135 ; about half the salaries fell 
within $20 of this average, that is, between $115 and $155• Though some 
workers—about 2 percent of the total—received $200 or more, about a 
third received less than $120, and almost two-thirds, less than $140 
(table 19). li/ 


Table 19.—Distribution of clerical workers' salaries 


Monthly salary 

Number 

Percent 

Total. 

11,635 

100.0 

Less than $100*. 

1,000 

8.6 

100 119.99 . 

2,965 

25.5 

120 - 139.99 . 

3,582 

30.8 

UO- 159.99 . 

1,953 

16.8 

160-179.99. 

853 

7.3 

180-199.99. 

1,023 

8.8 

200 - 219.99 . 

134 

1.2 

220 or more. 

125 

1.1 


The average (median) salary of $135 for all clerical workers was 
higher than the average (median) salary in two-thirds of the agencies. 
As in the case of visitors, this situation reflects the relatively high 
salaries paid in New York State and the heavy concentration of clerical 
personnel in that State. The average (median) salary in the median 
agency - $125 - , therefore, has been used as the measure of central 
tendency. Thirteen agencies had an average of $125, with 18 fa3J.ing 
below, and 14 above this amount (table 20 and chart 4). All clerks in 
Arkansas received less than this sum and in Washington all received 
salaries in excess of $125. 


15/ Appendix table V shows the distribution of salaries paid clerks ty 
$l 0 end $20 intervals for 48 agencies and the median and first and 
third quartiles for 46 agencies with 10 or more clerical workers. 


- 27 - 
















CHART 4. 

CLERKS: AVERAGE (MEDIAN) SALARY, 45 AGENCIES 


DOLLARS 


0 


50 


100 


150 


200 


WASH. 

ARIZ. 

MICH. 

CALIF. 

N.Y. 

UTAH 

W.VA. 

CONN. 

IDAHO 

ILL. 

MD. 

OHIO (BCG) 

OREG. 

WYO. 

FLA. 

IND. 

IOWA 

KANS. 

LA. 

MINN. 

MONT. 

N.J. (AB) 
OHIO (A) 
PA. 

TEX. 

VT. 

WIS. 

ALA. 

COLO. 

MAINE 

N.J. (C) 

N.MEX. 

N.C. 

N. DAK. 

R. I. 

S. C. 

VA. 

GA. 

MO. 

NEBR. 

N.H. 

S. DAK. 
MISS. 
TENN. 
ARK. 





































































Table 20•—Distribution of 45 agencies by average (median) 
S€ilary of clerical workers 


Average 

(median) 

salary 

Number 

of 

agencies 

State agenqy 

185. 

1 

Ark, 

95. 

2 

Miss., Tenn. 

105. 

5 

Ga., Mo., Nebr•, N,H,, S.Dak. 

115. 

10 

Ala., Colo., Maine, N.J. (C), 

N.Mex., N.C., N.Dak., R.I., 
S,C,, Va. 

125. 

13 

Fla., Ind., Iowa, Kans., La,, 
Minn., Mont., N.J, (AB), 

Ohio (A), Pa,, Tex., Vt., 

Wis. 

135. 

7 

Conn., Idaho, Ill., Md., 

Ohio (BCG), Oreg., Wyo. 

U5. 

4 

Calif., N.I,, Utah, W.Va. 

155. 

2 

Ariz,, Mich. 

175. 

1 

Wash, 


In high-income States, 16/ only two agencies~New Jersey Board of 
Children's Guardians and Rhode Island Division of Public Assistance— 
paid salaries that averaged less than $125* Six other agencies in high- 
income States, however, had an average of only $125; these were the old- 
age assistance agencies in Nev/ Jersey and Ohio and the agencies in 
Indiana, Montana, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. On the other hand, five 
agencies in low-income States—^Arizona, Idaho, Utah, West Virginia, and 
Wyoming—reported average salaries in excess of $125. 

South Carolina and Texas showed the least variation in salaries, 
with the middle half falling within one $10 class interval. In con¬ 
trast, the large number of clerical workers in New York received 
salaries that varied enough to require a $60 range to include the 
middle half. The usual range was $20 or $30 (table 21), 


16/ Those with the above-average per capita income in 1945* 


- 29 - 

















Table 21.—Distribation of 45 agencies by interquartile 
range in clerical workers* salaries 


Interquartile 

range 

Number of 
agencies 

State agency 

10. 

2 

S.C., Tex. 

10. 

8 

Ark., Ga., Idaho, Iowa, Mich., 
N.Mex., R.I., Tenn. 

20. 

13 

Calif., Colo., Fla., Ind., 
Miss., Mo., Nebr., N.C., 
N.Dak., Ohio (A), S.Dak., 
Utah, Va. 

30. 

17 

Ala., Ariz., Conn., Kans., 

La., Maine, Md., Minn., 

N.H., N.J. (AB), Ohio (BCG), 
Oreg., Pa., Wash., W.Va., 
Wis., ??yo. 

40. 

4 

lU., Mont., Vt., N.J. (C) 

60. 

1 

N.Y. 


Somewhat more than a third of all clerical workers included in 
the study were attached to 46 offices which serve areas including a 
city of 250,000 or more population. 17/ Among the 40 of these offices 
that employed 10 or more clerks, the average (median) salary was $125 
in about a fourth, and $135 in another fourth. Memphis was lowest with 
an average of $110, and New York Oily and Seattle were highest with 
$175. The 7 offices serving southern cities—Atlanta, Birmingham, 
Dallas, Houston, Memphis, New Orleans, and San Antonio—all had sal¬ 
aries averaging less than $135* Of the remaining 33 offices, clerical 
saLleiries averaged less than $135 in 12- and $135 or more in 21 
(table 22). 


"inj Appendix table VIII shows the distribution of salaries paid clerical 
workers by $10 and $20 intervals for 46 local offices serving areas 
that include cities of 250,000 or more population, and the median 
and first and third quartiles for the 40 offices with 10 or more 
clerical workers. 


- 30 - 














Table 22.—Distribution of 40 offices serving cities of 250,000 
or more by average (median) salary of clerical workers 

[k signifies administration of old-age assistance; B, aid to the 
blind; C, aid to dependent children; and G, general assistanc^ 


Average 

(median) 

salary 

Number 

of 

offices 

City served 

$110..... 

1 

Memphis 

Birmingham, Denver, Kansas City, 
Newark (C), Providence, St. Louis 
Atlanta, Baltimore, Buffalo, 

115. 

6 

125.. 

11 

130. 

1 

Columbus (a), Dallas, Houston, 
Jersey City (AB), New Orleans, 
Rochester, St. Paul, San Antonio 
Columbus (BG) 

Cincinnati (a), Cleveland (A) and 
(G), Indianapolis, Los Angeles, 
Newark (AB), Philadelphia, 
Pittsburgh, Portland, Toledo (A) 
Cleveland (C) 

Cincinnati (C) and (G) 

Cleveland (BG) 

Detroit, Milwaukee (A), 

Minneapolis 

Chicago, District of Columbia 

New York, Seattle 

135. 

10 

140. 

1 

■•45. 

2 

•Af > ••••••••••• 

150. 

1 

155. 

3 

165. 

2 

175. 

2 




- 31 - 



















INTlf-^CLASS COMPARISONS 


This section of the report brings together selected data from 
the preceding sections for purposes of interclass comparisons. 

The average (median) salary and the percentage distribution of 
salaries for each class of worker for all States combined is shown in 
ta-ble 23. The same data are presented in graphic form in chart 5* 

Table 23*—Percentage distribution of salaries, by class of worker 


Monthly salary 
and quartile 

Directors 

Supervisors 

- . 

Visitors 

Clerks 

Total. 

Percentage distribution 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

Monthly SEilary: 





Less than ^120... 

1.3 

— 

3.0 

34.1 

120-139.99. 

10.2 

.2 

17.3 

30.3 

140-159.99. 

12.6 

1.2 

26.3 

16.3 

160-179.99. 

19.0 

8.0 

23.0 

7.3 

iao-199.99. 

16.9 

19.6 

14.6 

8.3 

200-219.99. 

U.3 

26.8 

14.6 

1.2 

220-239.99. 

10.3 

24.7 

1.0 

.7 

240-259.99. 

6.2 

10.3 

.2 

.2 

260-279.99. 

2.4 

3.0 

(1) 

.1 

280-299.99. 

1.1 

1.1 

(1) 

(1) 

300 or more.. 

5.2 

5.1 

(1) 

(1) 


Monthly salary 

Quartile; 





First quartile... 

$165 

$195 

$145 

$115 

Median. 

1S5 

210 

165 

135 

Third quartile... 

230 

230 

195 

155 

Interquartile 





range.......... 

65 

35 

50 

40 


iJ Less than 0.05 percent. 


- 32 - 













































CHART 5. 

PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION AND INTERQUARTILE RANGE OF 
SALARIES, BY CLASS OF WORKER 


PERCENT 



$120 139.99 159.99 179.99 199.99 219.99 239.99 259.99 279.99 299.99 OVER 


Y/y\ MIDDLE HALF 


UPPER AND LOWER FOURTH 


- 53 - 





















































Interagency variations in salaries for each class of worker 
are shown in table 24, which indicates how many agencies had average 
salaries of specified amounts. 

Table 24.—Number of agencies with specified average 
(median) salary, by class of worker 

^ signifies national median l/7 


Average 

(median) 

salary 

Directors 

Supervisors 

Visitors 

Clerks 

Total.. 

18 

21 

48 

41 

^35•••*.•• 




1 

95. 

— 

— 

— 

2 

105. 

— 


— 

5 

115. 

— 

— 

2 

10 

125.•••••. 

— 

— 

2 

13 M 

135. 

2 

— 

10 

7 

145. 

1 

— 

6 

4 

150 

— 

— 

1 

— 

155. 

2 

— 

11 M 

2 

165. 

2 

— 

5 i 

— 

175. 

7 

— 

5 i 

1 1 

135. 

5 M 

2 

1 i 

— 

190. 

— 

2 


1 

195. 

3 

5 

4 i 


210. 

3 

10 M 

1 


230. 

8 

4 

— 

— 

240. 

1 

— 

— 


250. 

1 

2 



270. 

1 

— 



290. 

2 

— 

— 

— 


1/ For directors and 8\q)ervl8or8, represents the national average 
(median) for all agencies combined; for visitors and clerks, 
represents the average (median) salary for the median agency. 


In table 25 the relative position of each agency with respect 
to the average (median) salary for each class of worker is shown for 
“large-office” agencies classified by the per capita income of the 
States in which they are located. Table 26 presents similar data for 
"small-office” agencies. 


- 34 - 








































Table 25.—Relative position of large-office agencies l/ 
with respect to average (mediein) salary for all agencies 
combined, by class of worker 

/kA signifies above average; BA, below average; and M, median/ 


State agency 

Directors 

Supervisors 

- 1 

Visitors 

1 - 

Clerks 

Average (median) 
salary 2/. 

<135 

$210 

$155 

i 

i <125 

High-income States j/ 

Calif. 

1 

AA 

1 1 

M 

AA 

AA 

Conn. 

( 4 ) 

(4) 

BA 

AA 

D.C. 

( 4 ) 

(4) 

AA 

AA 

Ill. 

AA 

AA 

AA 

AA 

Ind. 

BA 

BA 

BA 

M 

Md. 

AA 

M 

BA 

AA 

Mich. 

AA 

AA 

AA 

AA 

N.J. (AB). 

AA 

M 

M 

U 

(C) . 

AA 

BA 

M 

BA 

N.Y. 

(5) 

AA 

AA 

AA 

Ohio (a). 

M 

BA 

M 

M 

Pa . 

AA 

M 

M 

M 

Wash. 

AA 

AA 

AA 

1 

AA 


Low-income States 2/ 

Ariz . 

AA 

(4). 

AA 

AA 

Colo. ... 

BA 

BA 

BA 

BA 

Fla . 

AA 

BA 

AA 

M 

La . 

AA j 

i M 

BA 

M 

Maine. 

(4) ! 

i BA 

M 

BA 

N.H. 

(4) 

1 U) 

BA 

BA 

S.C. 

BA 

(4) 

BA 

- BA 

Tex. 

AA 

— 

AA 

M 

W.Va. 

(4) 

(4) 

M 

AA 


1 / Agencies in which at least one-fifth of the local offices 
employ 10 or more v/orkers. 

2 / For directors and supervisors, represents the natiomil 

average (median) for all agencies combined; for visitors and 
clerks, represents average (median) salary for median agency. 
See pp. 17 and 27 for explanation. 

2^ States classified according to whether their 1945 per capita 
income was above or below the national average. 

4 / Not computed; base less than 10. 

2'' Not computed; data incomplete. See appendix table 1, 
footnote 7. 


- 35 - 













































Table 26.—Relative position of small-office agencies 3/ 
with respect to average (median)salary for all agencies 
combined, by class of worker 


signifies above average; BA, below average; and M, medial^ 


State agency 

Directors 

Supervisors 

Visitors 

Clerks 

Average (median) 
salary ^ . 

5135 

$210 

5155 

$125 

High-income States ^ 

Del. (C). 

— 

( 4 ) 

(4) 

(4) 

Mont.. 

BA 

— 

BA 

M 

Nev. 

( 4 ) 

— 

AA 

(4) 

Ohio (BCG). 

BA 

M 

M 

AA 

Oreg.. 

AA 

M 

M 

AA 

R.I. 

( 5 ) 

M 

BA 

BA 

Wis. 

AA 

(4) 

H 

M 


Low-income States ^ 

Ala. 

M 

( 4 ) 

BA 

BA 

Ark.«. 

BA 

(4) 

BA 

BA 

Ga. 

BA 

BA 

BA 

BA 

Idaho. 

AA 


AA 

AA 

Iowa. 

AA 

(4) 

BA 

M 

Kans... 

M 

H 

M 

M 

Ky. 

— 

(4) 

M 

— 

Minn. 

AA 

AA 

AA 

M 

Miss............. 

BA 


BA 

BA 

Mo. 

BA 

BA 

BA 

BA 

Nebr. 

BA 

(4) 

BA 

BA 

N.Mex. 

BA 

(4) 

BA 

BA 

N.C. 

AA 

BA 

BA 

BA 

N.Dak. 

BA 

— 

BA 

BA 

S.Dak. 

M 


AA 

BA 

Tenn. 

BA 

(4) 

BA 

BA 

Utah. 

AA 

AA 

AA 

AA 

Vt. 

— 

— 

AA 

M 

Va. 

BA 

M 

BA 

BA 

Vl^o. 

M 

— 

AA 

AA 


3 / Agencies in which less than one-fifth of the local offices 

employ 10 or more workers. 

2/ For directors and supervisors, represents the national 
average (median) for all agencies combined; for visitors 
and clerks, represents average (median) salary for median 
agency. See pp, I 7 and 27 for explanation. 

2 / States classified according to whether their 1945 per capita 
income was above or below the national average. 
ij Not computed; base less than 10. 

V Data not available. See appendix table II, footnote 6. 


- 36 - 















































FIELD REPRESENTATIVES 


In addition to information on salaries of local office employees, 
similar data were collected on State office field representatives, the 
group of State office employees whose positions are most nearly com¬ 
parable from State to State. Field representatives were defined as 
the employees with supervisory responsibility for the general adminis¬ 
tration of local offices and for the activities of local office per¬ 
sonnel in determining eligibility and providing assistance and service. 

A total of 439 field representatives were reported by 45 
agencies. 18/ Among these agencies, the number of representatives 
ranged from 1 each in Maine and Nevada to 62 in California. Only 14 
agencies had 10 or more field representatives, and more than one- 
fifth of the total were employed by the two agencies with the largest 
numbers—California and New York. 

Average Qiiedian) Salary and Range in Field Representatives* Salaries 

The average (median) salary for all field representatives was 
|250. The middle h^f of the salaries fell between ^30 and ^90—|60 
range. 19/ The wide variation in salaries for this class of employee 
is further indicated by the extremes, which included 4 percent paid 
less than $200 a month and 9 percent receiving |320 or more (table 27). 


Table 27.—Distribution of field 
representatives* salaries 


Monthly salary 

Number 

Percent 

Total. 

439 

100.0 

Less than $200.... 

18 

4.1 

200-219.99. 

71 

16.2 

220-239.99. 

94 

21.4 

240-259.99. 

97 

22.1 

260-279.99. 

40 

9.1 

280-299.99. 

46 

10.5 

300-319.99. 

34 

7.7 

320 or more. 

39 

8.9 


Much of the variation in salaries is the resiilt of interagency 
differences. Among the 14 agencies employing 10 or more field 


18/ The Vermont Department of Public Welfare and the West Virginia 
agency, both of which administer the programs through district 
offices, and the Delaware Board of Welfare b£.d no field 
representatives. 

]^/ Appendix table IX shows the distribution of salaries paid field 
representatives by $10 and |20 intervals for 45 agencies and the 
median and first and third quartiles for the 14 agencies with 10 
or more field reoresentatives. 


- 37 - 




















repres©ntativ6B, the average (median) salary varied from $210 in 
2 agencies to $37^ in one (table 28). 

Table 28.—Distribution of 14 agencies by average 
(median) salary of field representatives 


Average 

(median) 

salary 

Number 

of 

agencies 

State agoicy 

$210. 

2 

Ky., Ohio (A) 

230. 

2 

Mo., Ohio (BCG) 

250. 

3 

Iowa, Kans., Nebr. 

270. 

4 

Calif., Ill., Minn., Tex. 

290. 

1 

N.Y. 

310. 

1 

Pa. 

370. 

1 

Mich. 


Intra-agency differences in salaries, however, are not so great. 
In 29 agencies all salaries fell either within a single $20 class 
interval or within two or three consecutive intervals. Moreover, among 
10 of the 14 agencies oaploying 10 or more field representatives, the 
middle half of salaries fell within a range of $20 or less (table 29). 
Only the California agency paid salaries that covered a wide range in 
amounts. 


Table 29.—Distribution of 14 agencies by interquartile 
range in field representatives* salaries 


Inter¬ 

quartile 

range 

Number 

of 

agencies 

State agency 

$0. 

4 

Ky., N.I., Ohio (BCG), Tex. 

20. 

6 

Iowa, Kans., Mich., Nebr*, 



Ohio (iU,Pa. 

40. 

3 

Ill., Minn., Mo. 

60. 

1 

Calif. 


- 38 - 























APPENDIX A 


EXCLUDED EMPLOYEES 


Salary data weienot collected for the following local office positions: 

1. Approximately 1,000 part-time workers in 660 local offices cf 
59 agencies. Only in Kentucky, where part-time visitors repre¬ 
sented en equivalent of 21 full-time workers and in the State Board 
of Welfare cf Delaware where part-time v/orkers represented an 
equivalent of 4 full-time vjorkers, was the proportion of part-time 
workers measured in full-time equivalents as great as 10 percent 

of employees. An employee working on a part-time basis in several 
different local offices was considered a part-time worker even 
though his ccmibined time constituted a full-time job, 

2. An estimated 2,500 unfilled positions. 

3. Approximately 1,300 full-time positions not classified as directors, 
supervisors, visitors, or clerks; this group included positions 
such as assistant administrators, specialists, technicians, end 
maintenance and custodial workers. 


- 39 - 



APPn.T'IX E 


DEFINITIONS 


For purposet of the report on stderiee, the four me.jor classee 
of employees ?;ere defined as followe: 

Directors : Employees rho are the responsible head of the 
local office and who are commonly referred to as county 
director, administrator, superintendent, secretary, or 
director-worker• 

Supervi sors; Workers whose mejor function is supervision 
of (1) visitors or (l) supervisors of visitors. Does not 
include director-Y^crkers, consultants, or senior case 
workers who have some supervisory functions but whose major 
function is to carry assigned case loads or perform other 
duties. 

Visitor s; Employees in socieJ-work position involving the 
direct determination of original and continuing eligi¬ 
bility to receive assistance or the direct provision of 
service. Includes the social-work employees who are 
directly responsible for assigned case loads and who engage 
directly in social investigation and case-work services, 
who are responsible for intake 'end application investiga¬ 
tions, or who perform special investigations to determine 
age, employment, bank end insurance assets, and other 
facts pertinent to eligibility. Includes employees ccmiaonly 
referred to as visitors, case workers, investigators, and 
child welfare workers who carry assigned case loads; super¬ 
visors and consultants other than director-workers, when 
the major part of their work consists of directly carrying 
' assigned case loads; and intake w'orkers, application 

interviewers, and resource workers, provided they are 
regarded as being in social-work positions. 

Clerks ; Employees in seci*etarial, stenographic, typing, 
filing, bookkeeping, and clerical positions, including 
auditing, accounting, and statistical clerks. 


- 40 - 







APPIMDII C 


SCHEDULED HOURS OF WORK 


The number of hours of work per week required of full-tine 
employees in local offices varied from 33 to 43. More than half the 
agencies had a work week of less than 40 hours; the remainder include 
9 with a 40-hour week, 7 with a work week of more than 40 hours, and 
3 in which there was variation among local offices. The usxial number 
of hoiirs of work per week in local offices in 49 agencies was as 
follows: 


Less than 40 40 or more Yariatio n 


Agency 

Hours 

Agency 

Hours 

Agency 

Hours 

Ariz. 

39 

Ala. 

40 

Calif. 

37i-42 

Ark. 

39 

D.C. 

40 

Ind. 

40 -44 

Colo. 

33 

Ga. 

40 

Iowa 

40 -43 

Conn. 

36h 

Idaho 

40 

Mo. 

38i-41 

Del. (C) 

37| 

Kans. 

44 

Nebr. 

38 -43 

Fla. 

39J 

La. 

4ii 

N.J.(AB) 

33-331 

Ill. 

33i 

Maine 

40 

N.Y. 

35 -40 

Ky. 

39 

Mich. 

40 

Wis. 

40 -44 

Md. 

35i 

Minn. 

40 



Mont. 

38 

Miss. 

41 



Nev. 

33 

Ohio (A) 

41 



N.H. 

33? 

S.C. 

U 



N.J. (C) 

36| 

S.Dak. 

44 



N.Mex. 

39 

Tex. 

44 



N.C. 

39 

Va. 

40 




N.Dak. 33 

Ohio (BCG) 33j 

Oreg. 38 

Pa. 37i 

R.I. 37i 

Term. 38i 

Dtah 39 

Vt. 39 

Wash. 39 

W.Va. 39j 

Wyo.- 38 


41 - 









APPEWDII D 


REPORTIi'IG PERIOD 


The month for which salary data, were reported by the various 
agencies was the pay-roll period ended in— 

1945 124i 


December 

January 

February 

March 

April 

Total ^ 

1 

1 

A 

n 

Ala. 

N.I. 

Colo. 

Calif. 1/ 

Ariz. 

Ark. 


Idedio 

N.Mex. 

Iowa 

Conn. 


Ky. 

Tex* 

Kans. 

Del. 


La. 

T?.Va. 

Maine 

D.C. 


Wyo. 


Md. 

Fla. 




Mich. 

Ga. 




Mo. 

Ill. 




Nev. 

Ind. 




R.I. 

Minn. 




S.Dak. 

Miss. 




Vt. 


Mont. 

Nebr. 

N.H. 

N.J.(AB) 

(C) 

N.C. 

N.Dak. 

Ohio(A) 

(BCG) 

Oreg. 

Pe. 

S.C, 

Tenn. 

Utah 

Va. 

Vash. 

Wis. 


}J Except Los Angeles county which reported as of December 1945 • 


- 42 - 







APPENDIX E 


LOCAL OFFICES WITH SUPERVISOPS 


The number of local offices in each State which employ super¬ 
visors was as follows: 


Number of local offices 


Number of local offices 


Agency Total With super- Agency Total With super 


visors 


Total 


440 

Ala, 

67 

5 

Ariz, 

14 

2 

Ark. 

75 

1 

Calif. 

53 

23 

Colo. 

63 

8 

Conn. 

4 

4 

Del. (C) 

3 

1 

D.C. 

1 

1 

Fla. 

12 

12 

Ga. 

159 

4 

Idaho 

30 

0 

Ill. 

102 

33 

Ind. 

92 

19 

Iowa 

99 

4 

Kans. 

105 

8 

Ky. 

120 

6 

La. 

61 

20 

Maine 

22 

7 

Md. 

24 

6 

Mich. 

83 

21 

Minn. 

87 

4 

Miss. 

82 

0 

Mo. 

115 

7 

Mont. 

49 

0 


visors 


Nebr. 

93 

2 

Nev. 

9 

0 

N.H. 

7 

2 

N.J. (AB) 

21 

15 

(c) 

13 

12 

N.Mex. 

32 

2 

N.Y. 

128 

65 

N.C. 

100 

10 

N.Dak. 

53 

0 

Ohio(A) 

88 

8 

(BCG) 

207 

13 

Or eg. 

36 

1 

Pa. 

67 

47 

R.I. 

38 

9 

S.C. 

46 

5 

S.Dak. 

58 

0 

Tenn. 

95 

4 

Tex. 

40 

0 

Utah 

29 

3 

Vt. 

9 

0 

Va. 

123 

9 

Wash. 

39 

23 

W.Va. 

8 

8 

Wis. 

72 

6 

Wyo. 

23 

0 


- 43 - 











Ta%I« I.—Ciatrl^tlon of local office*, 'by State and ember of folL-tla* 


state 

Agency 

Type of local office 

Administering y 

Three 
special 
types of 
public 
aesiet- 
aaee 2 / 

General assistance 

All 

local 

offices 

Some 

local 

offices 

Totiil • -1 * T - - 






Alabama 

Department of Public Welfare 

County 

I 

X 


Aritona 

Department of Social Security and Welfare 

County 

X 

X 


Arkansas 

Department of Public Welfare 

County 

X 

X 


California 

Department of Social Welfare 

County 

X 

X 


Colorado 

Department of Public Welfare 

County 

X 

X 


Connecticut 

Office of Commissioner of Welfare; 






Dirlsion of Public Assistance 

District 5/ 

X 



Delaware 

Board of Welfare 

County 

C only 



District of Columbia 

Board of Public Welfare: 






Public Assistance and Children's Serricss 

City 

X 

X 


Tlorida 

Welfare Board 

District 5 / 

X 


X 

Georgia 

Department of Public Welfare 

County 

X 


X 

Idaho 

Department of Public Assistance 

County ^ 

X 


X 

Illinois 

Public Aid CosmiiBslon 

County 

X 



IndiifcAA 

Department of Public Welfare 

County 

I 






X 


X 

tansas 

Department of Social Welfare 

County 

X 

X 


Kentucky 

Department of Public Welfare: 







Coniitj 

X 



Louisiana 

Department of Public Welfare 

Parish 

X 

X 


Maine 

Department of Health' and Welfare 

District y 

X 



Maryland 

Department of Public Welfare 

County 

X 

X 


Michigan 

Department of Social Welfare 

County 

X 


X 

Minnesota 

Department of Social Security: 






Diwislon of Social Welfare 

County 

X 


X 

Mississippi 

Department of Public Welfare 

County 

X 



Missouri 

Social Security Commission 

County 

AAC 

X 


Montana 

Department of Public Welfare 

County 6 / 

X 

X 


Hebraska 

Department of Assistance and Child Welfare 

County 

X 


X 

Newada 

Welfare Department: 






Diflslon of Old Age Assistance 

District 5 / 

A only 



Haw KikVtpfhirA 

Department of Public Welfare 

District 2,/ 

X 



Hew Jersey 

Department of Institutions and Agencies: 





DlTision of Old Age Assistance 

County 

aab 




Board of Children's Guardians 

District y 

C only 



Hew Mexico 

Department of Public Welfare 

County 

X 

X 

... 

Hew Tork > 

Department of Social Welfare 

County and city 

1/ X 


1/ X 

Horth Carolina 

Board of Public Welfare 

County 

X 


X 

Horth Dakota 

Public Welfare Board 

County 

X 

X 


Ohio 

Department of Public Welfare: 








A only 




DiTision of Social Administration 

County and city y 

8 / B&C' 


g/x 

Oregon 

Public Welfare Commi'sion 

County 

X 

X 


PennsylTanla 

Department of Public Aseistano* 

County 

X 

X 


Bhode Island 

Department of Social Welfare: 






DiTision of Public Assistance 

Toen 

X 

X 


South Carolina 

Department of Public Welfare 

County 

X 

X 


South Dakota 

Department of Social Security 

County 6 / 

X 


X 




X 



Texas 

Department of Public Welfare 

District 5 / 

X 



Utah 

Department of Public Welfare 

County 

X 

X 


Vermont 

Depso’tment of Public Welfare 

District y 

B&O 



Virginia 

Department of Public Welfare 

County and city 

X 

X 


Washington 

Department of Social Security 

County 

X 

X 


Vest Virginia 

Department of Public Assistance 

District y 

X 

X 


Wisconsin 

Department of Public Welfare: 






DiTision of Public Assistance 

Co\inty 

9/ X 


X 

Wyoming 

Department of Public Welfare 

County 

X 

X 



y In addition to programs specified, staff of most offices spend some time on the administration of other welfare program*. 

2/ A signlfle* old-age aselstance; B, aid to the blind; C, aid to dependent children. 

V Part-time employees only or all positions raeant as of date of report. 

y Sxcludes offices la Alameda, Sacramento, San Diego, San Praaciseo, and Santa Clara Coonties irtilch serr* about one-fifth of the 
State's case load. 

2/ Por Connecticut, Maine, Sew Eai^shire, and Temont, the office serres an area ordinarily comprising ssTeral cities and towns. 
Tor all other States, ''district* is used to designate those offices ordinarily serring an area comprising more on* 
county; in the Hew Jersey Board of Children's Guardians half the district offices serre only one county. 


44 








































































•oployeea, for a pajr-roll period ended December 31 1 30, 19^ 


Total 

number 

of 

local 
of flee B 
reported 


Number of local offlcee with specified number of full-time eioployees 


Less than 6 

6-9 

10-14 

15-19 

20-24 

25-49 

50 

and 

oTsr 

State 

Total 

None ^ 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

1,896 

93 

276 

520 

489 

282 

236 

474 

243 

91 

60 

133 

59 

Total 

46 


. 

4 

18 

13 

11 

15 

3 

1 

1 


1 

aiabema 

7 




3 

3 

1 

3 

2 


1 


1 

Arliona 

66 



9 

40 

XI 

6 

g 



1 



ArkAQsaft 

23 

1 

2 

7 

5 

3 

5 

4 

5 

7 

3 

8 

3 

California 

4i 

2 

10 

17 

4 

6 

2 

9 

6 

3 

2 

1 

1 

Colorado 











1 

3 


Connecticut 

•t 


ee.... 


1 

X 








Delaware (C) 













1 

District of Columbia 



1 








9 

3 

norlda 

150 

1 

38 

47 

34 

23 

7 

2 

4 

1 

1 

1 

Oeorgla 

24 



13 

9 

X 

X 

3 

3 





Idaho 

31 


1 

7 

9 

9 

5 

3J 

20 

7 

3 

6 

1 

Illinois 

35 


1 

2 

8 

14 

10 

33 

13 

4 

1 

4 

2 

Indiana 

82 


X 

38 

20 

13 

10 

9 

6 


1 


1 

Iowa 

80 

2 

15 

18 

16 

17 

12 

12 

6 

2 

2 

2 

1 

Kansas 

^^Q 

16 

57 

33 

11 

2 




1 




Kentucky 

4 

2 

2 

31 

16 

4 

1 

4 

1 

Louisiana 

IR 



2 

15 

4 

4 

2 

4 


1 



Maine 

7 



1 

2 

3 

1 

6 

4 

2 

3 

1 

1 

Maryland 

37 


1 

7 

13 


12 

24 

10 

4 

4 

2 

2 

Michigan 

SI 




23 

12 

13 

22 

9 

2 



3 

Minnesota 

6 z 



16 

4l 

7 

c 

XX 

3 





Mleslsslppl 

S6 



10 

11 

15 

20 

44 

9 



4 

2 

Missouri 

42 

7P( 

1 

Q 

18 

10 

4 


4 

3 





Montana 

12 

g 

21 

24 

6 

7 

13 




1 

1 

Nebraska 

8 

X 

g 

X 



X 






Newada 







3 

2 


1 

1 


New Hampshire 

X 






1 

4 

5 

3 

2 

5 

1 

New Jersey (AB) 








6 

5 

1 


1 

New Jersey (C) 




Q 

C 


R 

g 

1 

1 


2 


New Mexico 

36 


1 

15 

y 

9 

A 

5 

y 

6 

17 

24 

14 

l4 

14 

9 

New fork 

66 


2 

11 

27 

15 

11 

22 

6 

2 

1 

3 


North Carolina 


ff 

20 

in 

4 

2 

4 






North Dakota 

49 



2 

9 

14 

11 

25 

18 

2 


4 

3 

Ohio (a) 

.✓0 

150 

42 

68 

49 

18 

7 

6 

5 

3 

1 

2 

4 

2 

Ohio (SCO) 

28 

4 

4 

5 

3 

3 

9 

3 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

Oregon 

10 




4 

3 

3 

7 

13 

10 

4 

16 

7 

Penneylyanla 

29 


17 

6 

2 

4 


4 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

Bhode Island 






8 

21 

8 

1 


1 


South Carolina 

ly 


2 

TQ 

1 n 

4 

X 

X 

X 





South Dakota 

5b 


■T 

22 


16 

7 

R 


1 


3 


Tennessee 

oD 


J 



7 

8 

3 

5 

15 

2 

Texas 

23 


c 

c . 

T 

4 

2 

2 

T 


1 


1 

1 

Utah 



2 

e^ 

T 

2 







Vermont (BC) 

9 

100 

3 

9 

38 

J 

27 

11 

12 

14 

5 

2 


1 

1 

Virginia 

13 


2 

6 

2 

1 

2 

6 

5 

3 

1 

7 

4 

Washington 











8 


West Virginia 

TT 




7 

C 

8 

13 

25 

10 

2 

1 

1 


Wisconsin 



T 

1 A 

X 

2 

2 




. 


Wyoming 

21 


J 













2.956 


67 

Ik 
75 
!i/ 53 
63 

4 

3 

1 

12 

159 

30 

102 

92 

99 

105 

120 

6l 

22 

24 

83 


87 
82 

115 

49 

93 

9 

7 

21 

13 

32 

1/ 128 

100 

53 

88 

BJ 207 
36 
67 

58 

95 

40 

29 

9 

123 

39 

8 

72 

23 


^ i. ~i...u»> 

^ “fleet (.o.tlr tom .«enole;) In eblch tnleile. pUd we net rel.knre.Me kp tke State; the.e etflce. eerre ekent ene per- 

8/ ttwllmtet'tttltltt." ttt!'t.e, er three ef the epecltled pre*r..e In ewl.ne ee.tl»tlene; eld t. dependent children «d 

2 / t“ep“t “„MlSh:“;tt“ttete”'tnt'.:r2Jt“t:»r. eld-ede ...letwce, wd ene edhlnleter. eld P, dependent children wd 
aid to the blind. 


- 45 - 







































































































































Table II.—Distribution of directors in local public assistance agencies, by State and 


-r 

State 

... _ ... 

Interquartile range 
of salaries 

(—■ --- 

Total 

number 


First 

quartile 

r 

Mediaoi 

Third 

quartile 

of 

directors 

Total... 

$165 

$185 

$230 

2.491 

Ala. 

185 

185 

195 

67 

Arit. 

230 

250 

270 

14 

e a 

125 

135 

135 

75 

Calif.... 

210 

240 • 

330 

2/ 52 

Colo.! 

155 

165 t 

185 

58 

Conn.I 

l 3 ) , 

( 3 ) , 

(3) 

4 

Del. ( 0 ).' 

_ 1 



0 

D.C. 

(3) 1 

(3) 

( 3 ) 

1 

Fla. 

230 

230 

250 

11 

Sa. 

135 , 

135 , 

165 

156 

XcLstlO • e e e 

185 

195 

210 

29 

III.■ 

210 1 

230 

230 

98 

Ind. 

165 

175 

210 

92 

lova. 

185 

195 

210 

99 

Kans. 

165 

185 

195 

101 

Ky. 

— 

— 


0 

La . 

210 

230 

230 

60 

Maine.... 

(3) 

( 3 ) 

(3) 

Q 

Md. 

195 

230 

250 

21 

Mich. 

210 

230 

250 

I 

Minn. 

185 

210 

230 

' 85 

Mies. 

135 

145 

145 

1 «1 

Mo . 

165 

175 

135 

; 111 

Mont . 

165 

175 

195 

48 

Nebr . 

155 

175 

185 

79 

Nev . 

(3) 

(3) 

( 3 ) 

‘ 2 

N.H . 

(3) 

( 3 ) 

(3) 

1 6 

n.j.iab;. 

250 

290 

330 

15 

N.J.^C).. 

230 

230 

250 

13 

N . Mex ... 

155 

175 

185 

30 

N.T . 


_ 


i ( 4 ) 

N.C . 

175 

210 

230 

97 

N.Dak. ... 

165 

175 

210 

43 

Ohlo( a) .. 

175 

135 

195 

87 

0 hlo(BC 0 )i 145 

155 

185 

11 / 158 

Oreg. 

210 

210 

250 

1 25 

?a. 

230 

290 

310 

66 

H.l. 


__ 


, ( 6 ) 

S.C. 

165 

165 

165 

' 46 

S.Dak- 

185 

155 

195 

55 

Tenn. 

145 

155 

155 

i 83 

Tex. 

230 

230 

230 

! 73 

Utah. 

185 

195 

210 

i 26 

vt.uc).. 


— 

— 

! 0 

Va. 

165 

175 

210 

( lU 

V:.sh. 

250 

270 

330 

1 25 

V.Va. 

(3) 

(3) 

(3) 

1 8 

Wis. 

195 

230 

250 

! 64 

Wyo. 

175 

_ 

185 

_ 

210 

1 

_ 


Number of directors receiTlng— 


Less than^$ 110 , 00 -'$ 120 . 00 -'$ 130 . 00 - $140.00-'$150.00-'$l60.00-'$170.00. 

$110.00 119.99 129.99 139.99 1^9.99 159.99 169.99 179.99 


12 21 58 195 112 203 210 263 


5 10 


1 23 38 12 . 1 . 

.. 1 1 . 2 

. 2 1 3 15 11 3 


9 . 6 . 92 . ^ • . . . ^ 5 20 * 2 


. 2 2 1 7 16 35 

... 3 6 12 

1 ! 1 6 6 ' 7 11 13 


. 3 

I 


I 


. 4 

6 

25 

35 

13 

5 

2 

R 

9 



14 

10 

14 

16 

6 

37 

11 

17 



1 


1 3 

2 

8 

7 





, 


m\ 

' 


.... *5 

s 

! 1 ' . 

• t • 

1 


y 

r 



i 


2 

1 

8 

8 

7 

" J 






14 

11 

2 

J 

8 

24 

1 

12 

5 

j 

14 

8 

1 

14 


28 


» 

* 


• 




' t ; 






7 

xx 


.1. 





1 

0 

4 

i 



13 

, 

49 

\ 

T i 



1 



1 






1 


2 t 

T 



1 






J 



J 1 

1 6 : 

4 


14 

1C 1 

1 7 




! 


\ 











1 

4 ! 

1 




1 ( 


1 


0 ; 

g 



J 

j 



y ! 

1 



\j Hapresents midpoint of intervals in ^dxidi quartilss fall. Because of high concentration of salaries at multiples 
of $5 and $10, use of midpoints may be overstatement of $5 for salaries classified by $10 intervals and of from 
$5 to $10 for salaries classified by $20 intervals. 


2/ Sxcludes directors in 5 counties. See table 1, footnote 4. 


- 46 














































































































amount of monthly ■alary, for a pay>roll period ended December 31* 1943-Aprll 30 , 1946 


Humber of dlreetore recelring— 


I$ 180 , 00 -'$ 190 . 00 -'$ 200 . 00 - $ 220 . 00 - ' $240.00-'$ 260 . 00 -'$ 280 , 00 -’$ 300 , 00 - $ 320 . 00 -'$340,00-'$ 360 . 00 -'$ 380.00 

i 1S9.99 199.99 219.99 239.99 259.99 279.99 299.99 319.99 339.99 359.99 379.99 or more 


state 


251 


171 


357 


268 


154 


59 


28 


57 


24 


13 


10 


25 


Total 


24 


13 


3 

i 4 , 

8 

7 

1 

3 

i 

7 

5 

2 

2 

5 

9 

1 ' 

7 

2 

3 




1 






' 1 


2 

2 




















Ala. 

Aris. 

Ark. 

Calif. 

Colo. 

Conn. 

Del.(C) 

D.C. 

Pla. 

Oa. 


2 

10 


7 

7 

1 

23 

24 


11 

1 

7 

7 

8 


9 

1 

1 

16 

9 


8 

27 

9 

20 

12 


19 

4 

3 


17 

6 

1 

38 

32 


9 

10 


3 

44 

12 

11 

4 


19 

1 

4 

3 


21 

1 

4 

4 

10 


5 

27 


Idaho 

Ill. 

Ind. 

I ova 
Kane. 

Ky. 

La. 

Maine 

Md. 

Mich. 

Minn. 

Mies. 

Mo. 

Mont. 

Nebr. 

Her. 

N.H. 

N.J.^AB) 

N.J.(C) 

H.Mez. 


10 


N.T. 

N.C. 

N.Dak. 

Ohio(A) 

Ohlo(BCO) 

Oreg. 

Pa. 

R. I. 

S. C. 
S.Dak. 


13 

4 

33 

3 


22 

3 


lb 

12 

5 

18 

12 

9 


lb 

1 

1 

2 

3 

6 


11 


5 

3 

17 


24 


‘4**1 

6 


14 


13 

4 

3 

3 


59 

1 


Tenn. 

Tex. 

Utah 

Vt.(BC) 

Va. 

Wash. 

V.Ta. 

Vie. 

Vyo, 


12 


17 


10 

2 


13 

2 


12 

5 


15 


J. 


1 / 


Not computed; base leas than 10. 

Data incotsplete. See table I, footnote 7* ' 

Includea 21 workers such as viaitors, specialists, and techniciane temporarily in charge of office. 
Salary data not available for 38 directors. 


- 47 









































































































Table III.—Dlotribution of eupervieore in local public assletajice agencies, by State and 


Interquartile range 

of salaries 1 / Total 

___ numb er 


state 

First 
' quartile 

-r 

Median 

of 

Tnird siiqjervisors 

quartile 

Total. 

$195 

$210 

f 

$230 ’ 

1,675 

^.laboma. 

( 2 ) 

( 2 ) 

( 2 ) 1 

7 

Arizona. 

( 2 ) 

( 2 ) 

( 2 ) 1 

7 

Arkansas. 

' ( 2 ) 

( 2 ) 

( 2 ) 1 

1 

California. 

210 

210 

230 ' 

U 13^ 

Colorado. 

185 

190 

195 i 

22 

Connecticut. 

( 2 ) 

( 2 ) 

( 2 ) 

9 

Delaware (C). 

( 2 ) 

( 2 ) 

( 2 ) ' 

1 

District of Columbia.•• 

( 2 ) 

( 2 ) 

( 2 ) j 

9 

Florida... 

175 

195 ^ 

210 ; 

37 

Georgia. 

1 ^75 

185 

210 ! 

13 

Idaho. 



**** 1 

0 

Illinois. 

195 

230 

230 ! 


Indiana. 

175 

185 

210 ; 

44 

Iowa... 

( 2 ) 

( 2 ) 

( 2 ) . 

7 

Kansas. 

195 

210 

210 1 

16 

Kentucky. 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) , 

7 

Louisiana. 

185 

210 

230 1 

52 

Maine... 

185 

195 

195 1 

10 

Maryland. 

190 

210 i 

230 ! 

36 

Michigan. 

210 

250 

250 ; 

61 

Minnesota. 

210 

230 

230 1 

54 

Mississippi. 

— 

— 

— 1 

0 

Missouri.... 

185 

195 

210 : 

68 

Montana... 

— 

— 

— ' 

0 

Nebraska... 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) ; 

9 


_^ 

_ 


0 

New Hampshire. 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) ! 

3 

New Jersey (aB). 

195 

210 

250 j 

30 

New Jersey (C). 

195 

195 

195 ■ 

l 4 

New Mexico... 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 1 

4 

New York. 

210 

230 

230 ! 

469 

North Carol54ia. 

175 

19c 

195 ! 

12 

North Dakota. 

— 

— 

— i 

0 

Ohio (a)... 

185 

195 

210 1 

22 

Ohio (BCG). 

195 

210 

230 

34 

Oregon....... 

210 

210 

230 ' 

11 

Pennsylvania. 

195 

210 

230 1 

199 

Rhode Island... 

205 

210 

230 ' 

16 

South Carolina......... 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

7 

South Dakota. 

— 

— 

1 

0 

Tennessee.. 

(2) 

(2) 

( 

(2) ' 

7 

Texas. 

— 

— 

- ! 

0 

Utah. 

210 

230 

230 ; 

17 

Vermont (BC). 

— 

-— 

— 

0 

Virginia. 

185 

210 

210 : 

14 

V/ashlngton............. 

230 

250 

250 1 

94 

West Virginia. 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 1 

8 

Vlisconsin... 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) j 

7 

Wyoming... 

! — 

— 

_ 1 

0 


Number of supervisors 

receiving- 


Less than 

$150.00- 

-| T 

$160.00- 

$170.00- 

$ 180 . 00 - 

$150.00 

1 

159.99 

169.99 

179.99 

189.99 

1 

i ^ 

15 

30 

104 

109 

— 



4 


! 





1 { 








1 

4 

\ 

1 

1 


q 


i 




12 

1 


1 

5 

1 

1 






9 

4 

1 . 3 

4 

5 

12 

i < 



1 

i. 



3 

1 


7 



6 

6 

2 




3 

1 


4 

5 

r 





'I 



3 

8 

13 


2 

2 

3 

. 1 

2 



. 2 

1 

1 

3 


2 1 


i 1 2 7 22 24 

1 . 4 1 

( 

•. 8 

1 . 1 5 . 

I,,,. 

'... 6 

.. 1 

2 5 . 



1] Represents midpoint of intervale in which quartilee fall. Because of high concentration of salaries at multiples 
of $5 $10, use of midpoints may be overstatement of $5 for salaries classified by $10 intervals and of from 

to $10 for salaries classified by $20 intervals. 


48 



























































































































amount of monthly salary, for a pay-roll period ended December 31 , 19 ^-ADrll } 0 , 19^6 




Ihunber of supervisors 

receiving- 

- r 

( 

i 

State 

1 

$190.00- 
199.59 , 

i 

1 

$200.00- ; 
219.99 1 

$ 220 . 00 - 
239.99 i 

r 

$ 240 . 00 - 1 

259.99 , 

$260.00- 1 
279.99 i 

$280.00- $300.CO- 
299. 99 319.99 

r 

$320.00- ' 
339.99 

j 

1 

$340.00 ' 

or more j 

1 219 

1 

449 

i 

4 l 4 

_ 

— 

i 

50 I 

19 i 

61 

1 

7 

- i 

1 

Total 

t 1 1 

: 


1 

( 



Alabama 


1 

5 : 

1 


i 



^ieona 

f . 


.:...j 



..... J_ 



Arkansas 

j l 4 


15 

11 

4 

1 i 

8 


3 

California 


i 



* 1 

1 




Colorado 

1 


9 



\ 



Connecticut 

1 ) 

. j 


1 


. I . J 


1 

Delaware (C) 



6 

1 

1 i 

1 



District O'f fiftinmbift 

1 

14 








Florida 

i. 2 

2 

1 

1 




Georgia 

\ 





1 

.i.. 



Idaho 

22 

Q 

52 

7 

.1 . 1. 



Illinois 

5 

J 

9 

3 


2 


1 



Indiana 


3 

2 

1 






Iowa 

1 

Q 


3 






Kansas 

I ^ 









Kentucky 

1 9 

13 

8 

4 

1 


1 


2 

Louisiana 

7 







Maine 

1 

9 

17 







Maryleind 

2 

20 


23 


1 

4 


4 

Michigan 

1 

1 R 

ac 

J 

16 

^ J 

4 

7 

1 




Minnesota 




. 



Mississippi 

OX 

R 

11 

3 



2 '. 

Missouri 

-7 

J 







1 


.. 




. 

















1 


New Hamnshire 


g 

X 

. ;**' 

1 

1 ' 



i 

New Jersey (aB) 

1 P 

2 

P 







New Jersey (C) 

1 

1 


.i. 

... 



1 

New Mexico 

!. 

23 

* 

S6 

194 

51 

12 

5 

28 

6 

8 

New York 


2 






1 

North Carolina 








! i 

North Dakota 

* fl! 

4 


1 





Ohio (a) 

! p 

Q 

10 

X 

2 





Ohio (BCO) 


7 

3 

J 

1 





Oregon 


I 

07 

J 

16 

11 

8 

■X 

12 



Pennsylvania 

Ho 

7f 

7 

R 

J 



Bhode Island 

3 

1 

7 



1 



South Carolina 










South Dakota 










Tennessee 










Texas 


c 

8 


1 





Utah 

d 

D 







Vermont (BC) 


fl 

2 







Virginia 


15 

7 

25 

1 

TP 

' 10 

5 

X 



Washington 

3 

3*- 


J 



West Virginia 


1 

1 







Wisconsin 

1 

3 








Wyoming 












2/ Kot computed; base less than 10. 

2 / Excludes supervisors in 5 counties; see table I, footnote 4 . 


- 49 
































































































































Table IT.--Metrlbution of ▼isltore in local public assistance a^ncies, by State and 


state 

Interouqrtile range 
of salaries 1/ 

Total 

number 


First ' 

quartlle : 

i 

Median 

Third 

quartile 

of 

visitors 

Total. 

$145 

$165 

$195 

14,830 

Alabama. 

125 

135 

135 

177 

Arisona. 

165 : 

185 

195 

90 

Arkansas. 

105 ' 

115 

115 

112 

California. 

155 

175 

195 

2/ 897 

Colorado.. 

125 

135 

155 

201 

Connecticut. 

130 

135 

165 

80 

Delaware (a) 2/. 

165 

165 

185 

11 

Delawsire (C). 

(4) 

(4) 

(4) 

4 

District of Columbia. 

175 

195 

195 

49 

71orida. 

145 

165 

175 

291 

Oeorgia. 

115 

125 

125 

183 

Idaho. 

155 

165 

175 

46 

Illinois. 

155 

175 

185 

818 

Indiana. 

135 

145 

165 

536 

Iowa. 

135 

145 

155 

167 

K’ATMfAA ....A...,.......-.-- 

135 

155 

175 

209 

Kentucky. 

155 

155 

155 

174 

T.nul ... 

135 

145 

155 

421 

Msdne. 

145 

155 

165 

98 

M*ryl&n(f . ... 

145 

145 

165 

238 

Michigan. 

185 

195 

195 

575 

Minnesota. 

155 

175 

175 

398' 

Mississippi. 

115 

115 

135 

119 

Missouri. 

135 

135 

145 

622 

Mon t^nA.. 

135 

145 

165 

39 

WAttrAflrfi. ................. 

125 

135 

145 

155 

Hava /4 A_ .................. 

185 

195 

210 

11 

B«;w Hampshire. 

125 

125 

135 

57 

New Jersey (aB). 

135 

155 

175 

174 

Hew Jersey (C). 

155 

155 

155 

129 

New Mexico. 

135 

135 

155 

90 

New York.... 

165 

210 

210 

3,056 

North Carolina. 

125 

135 

155 

236 

hAlrntA... 

135 

150 

175 

24 

Ohio (a). 

145 

155 

165 

532 

Ohio (BCO). 

155 

155 

175 

209 

Oregon. 

145 

155 

165 

169 

Pennsylvania. 

145 

155 

165 

1,113 

Bhode Island..*. 

135 

145 

155 

110 

South Carolina. 

125 

135 

135 

187 

South Dakota. 

155 

175 

175 

30 

Tennessee. 

125 

135 

135 

212 

Texas. 

195 

195 

195 

552 

Utah. 

155 

165 

175 

105 

Vermont (BC). 

lb5 

175 

185 

21 

Virginia. 

125 

135 

155 

207 

Washington. 

185 

195 

210 

476 

West Virginia. 

145 

155 

165 

176 

Wisconsin. 

145 

155 

165 

229 

Wyoming. 

155 

165 

165 

15 



45 

. 






Nunber of ▼ieitors receiiring^ 


Less than 
$100.00 


$ 100 . 00 - 

109.99 


$ 110 . 00 - 

119.99 


! 94 ! 347 


t 


4 - 


42 

2 

2 


49 


32 

* 16 * 


11 

6 


10 


63 


10 


10 

3 


5 

16 

13 


46 


16 


$ 120 , 00 - 

129.99 


$ 130 . 00 - 

139.99 


1,074 ' 1,496 


S 2 


25 


7*^ 

20 


96 


76 

U 

6 


90 


8 

18 

133 


43 


24 

13 


81 

56 

4 


23 


4 

17 

4g 


96 

1 


48 


8 

15 


51 


9 

27 

26 


71 

3? 

3 

32 

78 

40 

39 


50 

20 

1 


14 

34 

213 

15 

37 


9 

30 


47 

137 

51 

5 

57 

31 


17 

31 

123 


% 

2 


32 


11 

20 


1/ Represents midpoint of intervals in which quartiles fall. Because of high concentration of salaries at multiples 
~ of $5 and $ 10 , use of midpoints may oe overstatement of $5 for salaries classified by $10 Intervale and of from 
$9 to $10 for salaries classified by $20 intervals. 


50 - 







































































































































aoount of monthly sadary, for a pay-roll period ended Decerber 31» 1945 -Aprll 30| 1946 


Hunger of Tleitors receWlng— 


$li+0.C)0- ’ 

149.99 ■ 

$150.00b. 

159.99 

$160.00- ! 

169.99 , 

$170.00- ' 
179.99 i 

$180.00- ’ 
189.99 

$190.00- 1 $200.00- 

199.99 ' 219.99 ! 

$220.00- ' 
239.99 

$240.00 
or more 

l.7li: 1 

l 

2.183 

1,682 

1,732 

648 ' 

1.515 1 

2,160 1 

1 

143 

35 

1 

6 

.i.1 

! 


23 ‘ 

18 i 

16 1 

15 

17 1 

1 





23 i 
*»3 ■ 

^ 1 

217 

3“ 

7 

2 

15b 

b 

67 

11 

9 

73 : 

2 

283 ’ 

1 

62 

2 

.I 

3 

s 

** t 

*5 , 

3 

. 




5 ' 

1 

*5 




1 

1 



1 


2 ! 

* 


^ 1 



l4 

7 ! 

26 ' 

1 1 

1 

.1 

?6 ; 

i 

16 

42 ! 

125 

^ 1 
D 

1 

1 , 

3 


j 

1 



1 ‘ 




1 



i 



15 

go 

74 

14 

12 

12 

.i 

2 

2 

, 

100 ' 

1 

74 . 

go ■ 

139 

143 

14 

.!L. 

256 

30 , 

24 

157 



9 

.j""! 

6 ' 

3 

! 

53 






J ' 

174 

142 

12 

28 

..;.!.. 

73 

28 

1 Off 

to 

32 

4 


2 i 



34 




i 

51 

.i' ■ 

1 

1 

. 

Xco j 

1 

1 1 

S2 

J 

79 i 
20 

» 

340 

26 

49 

4 

21 


33 

9b 

42 

115 

36 

5 

.1 


. 

145 

in 

5 

3 

. 

52 

8 

7 

69 

2 

2 1 


3 



1 

1 j 





iU 

IQ 

b 

** 1 

1 1 





. ^ 


t I 

i. 


4 ' 

2 

5 




9 

Off 



1 1 





1 20 

' c 

14 

11 

1 1 

.1 

13 

1 




CO 

in 

4 



11 

99 

35 

Xv X 

19 

271 

J 

1 . . 

5 

221 

q 

2 

1 


. 

1 209 

131 

p: 

176 

1.629 

68 


•1 

i 2 

J 

7 

J 

’ U 





3 

125 

1C 

83 

282 

15 

3 

123 

49 

38 

29fa 

17 

p 

' 152 

13 

69 

32 

16 

4 

2 




1 l4 

' 1 

10 

11 

4 

9 

11 


2 


j 18 

1 301 



. 

, 

3 

1 

R 




il 

( 



1 

, , . . 

7 

3 

1, 


1 T 

IQ 

. 

1 





5 

1 3 

1 ff 


; 




C 

1 ® 

92 

20 

1 17 

433 

7 

5 

1 


3 

26 

’J 


R 



Xo 

R 

I 7 

! P 


y 


14 

5 

47 


14 

113 

ff 



t 


56 

7 

121 

162 

19 

5 

39 

49 

67 

6 

51 

39 

7 

1 

- 





f 

c 

3 

2 

27 


29 

lo 

D 

2 










2/ Exclude 
3/ Repress 
4/ Not com 

s visitors in 5 counties. See table I, footnote 4 
nta visitors working out of State office; no local 
puted; base less than 10. 

offices are maintained. 


State 


jn 

"1 


Total 


Alabama 
Arizona 
Arkansas 
California 
Colorado 
Connecticut 
Delaware (a) J/ 
Delaware (C) 

District of Columbia 
Tlorida 

Georgia 

Idaho 

Illinois 

Indiana 

Iowa 

Eonsas 

Kentucky 

Louisiana 

Maine 

Maryland 

Michigan 

Minnesota 

Miesissippi 

Missouri 

Montana 

Nebraska 

Nevada 

New Hampshire 


New Mexico 
New York 
North Carolina 
North Dakota 
Ohio (a) 

Ohio (BCG) 
Oregon 

Pennsylvania 
Bhode Island 
South Carolina 

South Dakota 
Tennessee 
Texas 
Utah 

Termont (BC) 

Virginia 

Washington 

Vest Virginia 

Wisconsin 

Wyoming 


A 


51 - 














































































































Ta^le V.—Distribution of dorks in local public assistance agencies, by State and 


State 


Interquartile range 
of salaries ij 


First 


Third 


Total 

number 

of 


Number of clerks recelving- 


quartile i | quartile 


- 1 -- 

Lees than $ 80 . 00 - $ 90 . 00 - 

$ 80.00 89.99 . 99.99 

$100.00- '$110.00- $120.00- 
109.99 1 119.99 129.99 

3 ?- 353 1 615 

1 

1 * ^ 

1,218 ! 1,747 1,700 

! 


12 1 39 25 

. 70 22 

7 i. 

.;. 4 

. 6 

2 45 49 

56 21 52 1 

1 ■' 7 4 ■ 

1 . 1 



. ^5 

50 23 55 

77 61 19 

.'.. 13 


68 43 50 

4 i 62 68 

9 77 56 

25 40 53 

2 10 13 

S 4 10 


Total, 


iila. 

arit., 

drk. 

Calif... 
Colo.... 
Conn.... 
Eel.(C). 

D.C. 

ila. 

Oa.. 


Idaho. 
Ill... 
Ind... 
Iowa., 
Kane.. 

Ky..., 

La..., 

Maine, 
Md.... 

Mich.. 


Minn. 

Kiss.. 

Mo........ 

Mont...... 

Nebr.. 

uev. 

K.E.. 

n.j.(ab)., 

N.J.(C).., 

N.Kex..... 


N.y. 

H.C. 

N.Cak.. 

Ohio(A). 

Ohio(BC(x)... 

Oreg.. 

Pa. 

R.I. 


S.Dak.. 


Tenn... 
Tez..., 
Utah... 
Vt(BC). 

Va. 

Wash... 
W.Va... 
Wis.... 
Wyo.... 


$115 


95 

135 

S 5 

135 

105 

115 

( 3 ) 

155 

105 

105 

125 

125 

115 

115 

115 

105 

105 

115 

145 

115 

65 

95 

105 

95 

( 3 ) 

95 

105 

115 

115 

125 

105 

105 

115 

115 

115 

115 

105 

115 

95 

95 

125 

135 

95 

105 

155 

125 

115 

115 


$135 


$155 11,635 


115 

125 

1U3 

155 

165 

59 

85 

95 

99 

145 

155 

2/ 855 

115 

125 

194 

135 

145 

38 

( 3 ) 

( 3 ) 

3 

165 

170 

44 

125 

125 

171 

105 

115 

205 

135 

135 

4 l 

135 

165 

561 

125 

135 

296 

125 

125 

181 

125 

145 

248 

0 

125 

135 

333 

115 

135 

70 

135 

145 

139 

155 

155 

24 l 

125 

145 

431 

95 

105 

108 

105 

115 

i ^36 

125 

145 

65 

105 

115 

l 4 i 

( 3 ) 

( 3 ) 

1 

105 

125 

30 

125 

135 

174 

115 

155 

78 

115 

125 

72 

145 

185 

2,814 

115 ■ 

125 

23s 

115 

125 

60 

125 1 

135 

245 

135 

145 

249 

135 

145 

145 

125 

145 

818 

115 . 

115 

95 

115 

115 

105 

105 

115 

60 

95 : 

105 

137 


125 

282 

. 

1^5 . 

155 

65 

125 , 

135 

10 

115 ■ 

125 

206 

175 ' 

185 

362 

145 

155 

51 

125 ‘ 

145 

201 

135 

145 

29 


1 

1 

22 


13 




5 

51 

12 

48 

36 

16 

38 

S 3 

4 

22 

1 



16 

37 

38 

68 

73 



33 

32 

31 

11 

1 



87 

53 

161 

58 

4 i 





17 

10 

11 

9 


11 

4 l 

33 

22 

10 


7 

l6 


6 

24 

16 


3 

22 

33 


1 

2 

1 

27 

l 4 

3 

59 

34 

8 

1 

119 ■ 
48 

^7 : 

180 

56 

8 

92 

37 

2 

4 

10 

19 ' 




11 ! 

33 


l 4 

18 

47 


80 

17 

24 

24 

50 


233 

40 

63 

l6 

9 I 
6l ' 


3 

20 


42 


34 




3 1 17 

23 


9 

37 

9 


10 

28 

3 

19 

403 

42 

13 

59 

4 1 
23 

S 2 

12 

6 

1 

6 

159 

9 

3 

42 


5 

36 

2 


ly Represents mi(^olnt of intervals in which quartiles fall. Because of high concentration of salaries at 
multiples of $5 and $10, use of midpoint maj' be overstatement of $5 for salaries classified by $10 
intervale and of from $5 to $10 for salaries classified by $20 intervals. 


52 














































































































amount of monthly salary for a pay-roll period ended December 31 # 19 ^-'^ril 30, 19^6 


Somber of clerks recelvlng- 


$130.00- 

139.99 

$l 40 . 00 - 

149.99 

$150.00- 

159.99 

$160.00- 

169.99 

$170.00- 

179.99 

$ 180 . 00 - 

189.99 

$190.00- 

199.99 

$ 200 , 00 - 

219.99 

$ 220 . 00 - 

239.99 

$ 240.00 
or more 

SUte 

1,882 

990 

963 

544 

309 

855 

168 

134 

87 

38 

Total 

Ala. 

Axis. 

Ark. 

Calif. 

Colo. 

Conn. 

Del.(C) 

D. C. 

Fla. 

Ga. 

Idaho 

Ill. 

Ind. 

Iowa 

Fans. 

Ky. 

La. 

Maine 

Md. 

Mich. 

Minn. 

Miss. 

Mo. 

Mont. 

Nebr. 

Nev, 

H.H. 

h.j.Cab) 

N.J.(C) 

S.Mex. 

H.Y. 

N.C. 

H.Dak. 

Ohio( a) 
Ohio(BCG) 
Oreg, 

Fa. 

E. I. 

S.C. 

S.Dak. 

Tenn. 

Tex. 

Utah 

7 t.(BC) 

Va. 

Wash. 

W. 7 a. 

Wis. 

Wyo. 

16 

14 


1 

7 


1 

2 

1 

9 


1 

1 



8 

13 







276 

11 

5 

1 

98 

22 

7 

201 

5 

1 

42 

5 

2 

36 

1 

2 

28 

42 

13 

11 

8 

2 


1 






9 

17 

1 

10 

50 

13 

9 

30 

10 

16 

3 

14 

1 

6 

i 

1 


2 

9 

12 

18 

157 

55 

26 

38 


1 

2 











50 

9 

91 

9 

2 

12 

52 

2 






8 

1 

10 



1 

1 

3 

3 



13 

1 


1 




4o 

21 

16 

4o 

63 

20 

1 

26 

53 

32 

22 

23 


2 

2 


1 





8 

95 

33 

lU i 3 

9 

4 

13 





18 

3 ^; 

26 

1 e 

4 

7 




6 

1 


1 


15 

9 

11 

l 4 

8 

3 

1 

4 

1 

3 i 3 



1 

1 


6 


. 









1 
















36 

12 

1 

8 

290 

12 

2 

26 

46 

20 

60 

5 

5 

19 

7 

1 

2 

2 

5 

1 

2 

2 

2 

4 

. 

4 

551 

22 

5 

57 

35 

38 

121 

2 

10 




1 2 

3 

19 

7 

76 

1 

2 

107 

2 

1 

7 

7 

12 

65 

1 

60 

671 

1 

57 

4 l 

56 

1 

17 










5 

4 

11 

1 

5 

4 


1 

7 

1 

15 

1 

19 

















2 

56 

*11 

4 

26 

1 

9 

24 











3 






12 

4 

3 


2 







9 

12 

111 

10 

20 

5 

3 

4o 

1 

74 

1 

5 






60 

28 

7 

1 

39 

seaeesssee 

3 

teeeaeeee 

7 

see ••♦•e« 

8 

31 

10 

11 

20 

3 

6 

1 










i 


2 / Excludes clerks in 5 counties. See table I, footnote 4 , 
^ Not computed; base less than 10 , 


53 
















































































































Table VI.—Distrlbutloa of supervisors in local public assistance offices serving cities of 250,000 or luors 


state and city 

-r 

Interquartile range 
of salaries ^ 

Jirst i . „ ( Third 

quartile j j quavtile 

Total. 

$210 1 $230 ■ $230 


T 


Total 
number 
of 


Juiflbor of supervisors receivlng- 


sunervisors bess than $170,00— |$1B0.0C— i>190,00- 

^ $170.00 i 179.99 J 139.99 h99.99 


855 


22 


33 


20 


Ala. 

: Birmingham. 1 

(2) i 

(2) 

(2) 

2 

Calif. 

3/1 Los Angeles. 

210 i 

210 

230 

33 

Colo. 

: Denver. 

185 ' 

195 

195 

lU 

D.C... 


(2) * 

(2) 

(2) 

9 

Ga. 

t Atlanta. 

(2) ' 

(2) 

(2) 

9 

Ill. 

: Chicago. 

230 , 

230 

230 

59 

Ind. 

: Indianapolis. j 

(2) ' 

(2) 

(2) 

9 

Ky. 

t Louisville.. 

(2) ! 

(2) 

(2) 

2 

La. 

: New Orleans. 

210 ! 

230 

250 

22 

Md. 

: Baltimore. 

185 ; 

230 

230 

27 

Mich. 

; Detroit. ' 

230 

25c 

250 

22 

Minn. 

: Minneapolis.. 

230 ' 

230 

250 

20 


St. Paul. 

210 i 

210 

250 

21 

Mo. 

: Kansas City. 

185 

135 

210 

22 


St. Louis. 

195 

195 

220 

28 

N.J. 

: Jersey City (AB)... 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

2 


(c).... 

— 

— 

— 

0 


Newark (aB). 

(2) i 

(2) 

(2) 

8 


(C). 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

3 

a.T. 

t Buffalo.... 

210 

210 

250 

33 


New York. 

230 

230 

250 

272 


Rochester. 

(2) ■ 

(2) 

(2) 

9 

Ohio 

: Cincinnati (A). 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

5 


(c). 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

3 


(B). 


— 

.— 

0 


(0). 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

5 


Cleveland (a). 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

5 


(C). 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

5 


(B&). 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

4 


(&). 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

4 


Columbus (a). 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

4 


(C). 

1 

— 

_ 

0 


' (BO). 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

4 


Toledo (a). 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

1 


(C). 


•- 

-— 

0 


(B). 

I __ 

_ 

— 

0 


(0). 

; (2) 

(2) 

(2) 

2 

Oreg. 

: Portland. 

i 210 

210 

230 

11 

Pa. 

: Philadelphia. 

j 195 

210 

230 

43 


Pittsbiirgh.. 

210 

210 

210 

45 

E.I. 

: Providence.. 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

6 

Tenn. 

: Memphis.. 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

2 

Tex. 

: Dallas........ 

— 


— 

0 


Houston..... 

— 

— 

— 

0 


San Antonio. 

— 


— 

0 

Wash. 

: Seattle. 

220 

240 

250 

8 

Wis. 

: Milwaukee (a). 

! (2) 

(2) 

(2) 

2 


(CB). 

— 


— 

0 



. 

1 

2 1 .. 



1 





1 



13 

9 


...' 1 

1 1 i. 








. 

_ 1 




1 . 1 



^ Bepresents midpoint of intervals in tdiich quartiles fall. Because of high concentration of salaries at 

multiples of $5 &nd $10, use of midpoints may be overstatement of $5 for salaries classified by $10 intervals 
and of from $5 to $10 for salaries classified by $20 intervale. 


54 



































































































































popxilatlon, by State and aaount of monthly salary, for a pay-roll period ended December 31 1 19^3-April 30t 19^ 




ti 

1 

of sv^ervisors receiving— 



state and city 

$200.CO- 
219. S9 

I $220.00- 
I 239.99 

$240.00- 

259.99 

$260.C0- 

279.99 

i $280.00- 
- 299.99 

$300.CO- 
319. 99 

’ $ 320 . 00 - 
* 339.00 

$340.00 
or more 

1 

1 22U 

i 

I 288 

103 

21 

1 

i 7 


53 

i 

6 

13 


Total 










Ala. 


Birmingham 



6 

1 

1 


8 


2 

Calif 

• y 

Lob Angeles 


1 








Colo. 


Denver 



6 

1 

1 


1 



D.C. 



2 

1 

1 







Oa. 


Atlanta 

7 

45 

7 







Ill. 


Chicago 

5 



1 



1 



Ind. 


Indianapolis 









2y. 


Louisville 

8 

5 

3 

1 



1 


2 

La. 


New Orleans 

6 

l4 








Md. 


Baltimore 

3 

3 

13 






3 

Mich. 


Deti'oit 

2 

12 


u 

1 





Klnn. 


Minneapolis 

14 

1 

4 

2 








St. Paul 

2 

3 

1 




1 



Ko. 


Kansas City 

2 

5 

1 




1 





St. Louis 










N.J. 


Jersey City (aB) 












(C) 

1 


5 





1 

1 



Hework (aB) 












(c) 

l6 

2 

6 

1 




. 2 


H.Y. 


Buffalo 

39 

16C 

35 

4 

1 


26 

2 

5 



New York 

\ 

u 






. 1 




Bochester 







1 



Ohio 

{ Cincinnati (A) 


2 

1 








(C) 












(B) 

2 


1 









(G) 

1 




• 






Cleveland (a) 

1 

2 

1 

1 







(C) 

1 

. 2 


1 



, 





(BG) 

"T 






; 





(o) 

J 


1 








Colvtmbua (a) 


Cc) 

(BG) 

Toledo !a) 

(C) 


•1 








(0) 

' 7 

n sr 

*2 



1 '... 

■ 



: Portland 

i' 5 





7 . 


: Philadelphia 

i 1® 

• 25 

o 


5 

\ __ 


5 . 


Pittsburgh 

T 






; Providence 


1 j 




' 



: Memphis 




.. 



i 6 

1 1 

1 

7 

1 

8 

p ‘ j ‘ 7 .. Vash. ; Seattle 



r . 

1_ 

. 

. 

i_ 1 _ 1-1 - \ - 


2/ Hot computed; base lees than 10. . c * v-. t ^ k 

2/ Data not available for offices serving citlee of Oakland and San Francisco. See table I, footno.e 4. 


55 























































































laibl* TIl.~Dl*tribution of ritltora in local pal>lio assistance offices serving cities of 250*000 or more 


state and city 

) 

Interquartile range 
of salaries 1/ 

Total 

number 

of 

risitors 

Tirst 

quartlle 

Median 

Third 

quartile 


Total. 1 

$155 

$185 

$210 

5.266 

Ala 

: 

» 

Birmingham. 

135 

135 

145 

33 

Calif. 

Zjx 

Los Angeles. j 

155 

185 

195 

553 

Colo. 

Denrer. 

125 

125 

155 

59 

D.C... 



175 

195 

195 

49 

Oa 

t 

Atlanta. 

135 

135 

135 

47 

Ill. 

1 

Chicago. 

165 

195 

210 

356 

Ind. 

t 

Indianapolis. > 

1 U 5 

165 

165 

53 

Ky. 

: 

Louisrille. 

155 

155 

155 

15 

La. 

t 

Hew Orleans. , 

135 

155 

165 

90 

Md. 

t 

Baltimore.. i 

145 

145 

155 

120 

Mich. 

t 

Detroit. , 

i 

175 

195 

195 

140 

Minn. 


Minneapolis. 

165 

195 

210 

113 



St. Paul. , 

155 

165 

175 

72 

Mo. 

: 

EansM City. 

145 

165 

175 

93 



St. Louis. 

135 

145 

165 

146 

S.J. 

• 

Jersey City (aB). 

(0. 

14^ 

( 3 ) 


W 

13 

5 



Mewark (aB). 

185 

185 

195 

28 



(C). 

155 

155 

155 

31 

H.T. 

t 

Buffalo. 

155 

165 

185 

183 



Hew York. 

210 

210 

210 

1,865 



Bochester. 

175 

175 

175 

42 

Ohio 


Cincinnati (a). 

145 

165 

165 

39 



(c). 

175 

185 

185 

10 



(B). 

(3) 

(3) 

(3) 

1 



(a). 

135 

155 

195 

20 



Clereland (a). 

145 

165 

175 

49 



(C). 

175 

210 

230 

26 



(BO). 

135 

160 

165 

22 



(0). 

145 

155 

155 

18 



Columhus (a). 

165 

165 

175 

35 



(0). 

( 3 ) 

(3) 

(3) 

5 



(BO). 

( 3 ) 

( 3 ) 

( 3 ) 

7 



Toledo (a). 

160 

165 

175 

16 



(0. 

(3) 

( 3 ) 

(3) 

3 



(B). 

(3) 

(3) 

( 3 ) 

1 



(0). 

( 3 ) 

(3) 

( 3 ) 

7 

Oreg. 

: 

Portland. 

145 

155 

165 

87 

Pa. 

t 

Philadelphia. 

145 

165 

185 

270 



Pittsburgh. 

145 

155 

165 

208 

E.l. 

1 

Proridenee. 

135 

135 

165 

55 

Tenn. 

e 

Memphis... 

125 

135 

135 

28 

Tez. 

t 

Dallas. 

195 

195 

195 

38 



Houston. 

175 

195 

195 

34 



San Antonio.. 

195 

195 

195 

?6 

Wash. 

e 

e 

Seattle. 

175 

195 

210 

125 

Wis. 

t 

Milwaukee (a). 

230 

230 

230 

20 



(CB). 

210 

_ 

230 

_ 

230 

10 


T 


j Humber of risitors receiTing>-- 

; Less than 
[ $ 120,00 

$ 120 . 00 - 

129.99 

$ 130 , 00 - 

139.99 

$140.00- 

149.99 

4 

97 

199 

487 

1 

7 

12 

13 


1 . . 

3U 

. 3‘'” 

6 



11 

35 

4 ^ 

7 



4 



✓ » 


16 




79 

. 

1 

. 


. 1 

I. . . . .... 


. 


i 


5 

23 

44 

3 


16 

51 

1 


1. 





. 



i 

. 





. 

3 






2 > t 

1 


L. 

11 



^ .... 

^. 





5 


2 

15 

1 

1 

1 . 






3 

2 


1 1 2 




4 






7 




2 















39 

100 

62 

7 



. 

6 

1 

23 

18 


1 

5 

6 


3 
























1 


1/ Bepresents midpoint of interrals in which quartiles fall. Becaxise of hi^ concentration of salaries at 

multiples of $5 and $10, use of midpointe may he OTerstatement of $5 for salaries classified hy $10 intervals 
and of from $5 to $10 for salaries classified hy $20 interrals* 


56 - 










































































































































population, by Stata and anount of monthly aalary, for a pay-roll period anded December 31 » 1945 -Aprll 30# 19 *<^ 


Himber of Tlsltora receiving— 

State and city 

$150.00- i 
159.99 1 

$ 160 . 00 - 

169.99 

$170.00- 

179.99 

$ 180 . 00 - 

189.99 

$190.00- . 

199.99 1 

} 

$ 200 . 00 - 

219.99 

I $220.00- 

1 239.99 • 

$ 240.00 
or more 

1 

■ 

424 ; 

1 

507 

307 

647 

1.843 

—n 

; 105 7 

Total 



t 

1 

t 




t 

Birmingham 

Los Angeles 

Denver 

1 164 , 

1 6 

78 

1 

24 

8 

13 

1 

252 , 

18 

1 

3 

Calif. 2 / 
Colo. 


;.' 


14 

7 

26 

1 

1 . 

D.C, 







Oa. 

i 

Atlanta 

■ 39 

. 8 

15 

. 26 

1 

43 

31 

18 

30 

24 

157 


Ill. 

Chicago 

Indianapolis 

Louisville 


Ind. 

t 






Ky. 

La. 

: 

7 

15 

19 

38 

7 


2 




New Orleans 

R 

3 

1 



Md. 

a 

Baltimore 

J 

31 

12 

1 

60 

23 

1 

11 


Kloh. 

t 

Detroit 

24 

25 

7 

34 

1 

5 . 

Minn. 

: 

Minneapolis 

St. Paul 

1 

6 

32 

35 

31 


19 

18 





Mo. 

s 

Kansas City 

St. Louis 

2 






' 7 





V.J. 

1 

Jersey City (ab) 

(0) 

2 


1 

2 




2 

2 

2 

11 

1 

11 





Newark (aB) 

25 

87 

37 

4 


4 

1 




(0 

16 

13 

1 

46 

39 

3 

27 

1,544 


N.T. 

: 

Buffalo 

56 

32 

T 

111 

1 

61 

4 


New Tork 

Rochester 

8 

16 

1 

j. 




Ohio 

i 

Cincinnati (a) 

y 

1 

7 





(C) 










(B) 

c 


1 


6 





( 0 ). 


17 

15 

4 


1 



, 


Cleveland (a) 

P 

i 2 

3 

4 

10 



(C) 

U. 


3 

1 

1 ^ 

1 

1 



(BO) 

\ 

11 

T 


1. 






( 0 ) 

IQ 

8 

i 1 






Columbus (a) 

; P 

> R 


1 






(0 

P 



1:::::::::: 






(BO) 

0 


7 


1 





Toledo (a) 


• y 

1 

* 2 


, 1 




(C) 



1 







(B) 



(, 


1 1 





( 0 ) 


I 

^ P 

1 

' 1 

i R 

2 


Oreg. 

Pa. 


Portland 

1 11 

52 

ho 

* 17 

\ 71 

1 y 

' 2 



: 

Philadelphia 

1 M 


1 



, 


Pittsburg 

» W 


1 

! 4 

i 2 



R.I. 

. 

Providence 

. ^ 

' 1 


i ^ 

1 



Tenn. 

: 

Memphis 

i 


5 

9 


i 33 
i 25 

1. 22 



Tex. 

t 

Dallas 




1 

i 


Houston 


4 

1. 


' 1 

* 


San Antonio 


1 ^ 

34 

i 21 

1 

1 30 

40 


Wash. 

: 

Seattle 




.i 20 . 

Wis. 

t 

Milwaukee (a) 


1_I_I_ '***1 _I___i-1-——j- 

2 / Data not available for offices eerring cities of Oakland and San Trancieoo. See table I, footnote 4 . 
2 ^/ Not computed; baee lees than 10 » 


57 
































































































Tal)le 7111 .—Siatrl'butioc of clerks in local public aselstance offices serving cities of 230,000 or more i 


Interquartile range 
of salaries ^ 


state and city 

Jirst 

quartile 

Median 

Third 

quartile 

1 

To tal... 

$125 

$145 

— 

$175 i 


Birmingham. 

95 

115 

125 

Calif. 2 / 

Los Angeles. 

135 

135 

155 

Colo. 

Denver.. 

105 

115 

125 

D.C. 

Ga. 

Atlanta. 

155 

115 

165 

125 

170 

135 

Ill. 

Chicago. 

145 

165 

165 

Ind. 

Indianapolis.... 

125 

135 

165 

£y. 

Louisville...... 

— 

— 

-— 

La. 

New Orleans. 

105 

125 

125 

tid. 

Dal tifflor e. 

115 

125 

145 

Mich. 

Detroit... 

l>t 5 

155 

175 1 

Minn. 

Minneapolis. 

125 

155 

175 


St. Paul........ 

115 

125 

135 

Mo. 

Kansas City. 

105 

115 

125 


St. Louis....... 

105 

115 

125 1 

N.J. 

Jersey City (AB) 

125 

125 

135 : 


(C) 

( 3 ) 

( 3 ) 



Newark (AB). 

135 

135 

145 


(C) . 

105 

115 

155 

N.Y. 

Buffalo . 

125 

125 

155 


New York . . 

135 

175 

185 


Eochsster.. 

125 

125 

135 1 

Ohio 

Cincinnati (a).. 

125 

135 

145 1 


(C).. 

125 

145 

155 i 


( 3 ).. 


( 3 ) ! 


(Cr). . 

145 


195 , 


Cleveland (a)... 

115 

135 

135 


(C)... 

135 

l 4 o 

155 ! 


(BG).. 

135 

150 

165 1 


(d). .. 

115 

135 

135 ' 


Columbus (a).... 

125 

125 

( 3 ) 

i 4 o t 


' (C)..,. 

( 3 ) 

( 3 ) 


(BG)... 

115 

130 

145 


Toledo (a) . 

125 

135 

135 


(C) . 

( 3 ) 

( 3 ) 

( 3 ) 


(B) . 

-— 

-— 



(d) . 

( 3 ) 

( 3 ) 

( 3 ) 

Oreg. 

Portlsuid . 

125 

135 

1U5 

1'45 1 

Pa. 

Philadelphia.... 

115 

135 


Pittsburgh. ..... 

115 

135 

155 i 

E.I. 

Providence .. 

105 

115 

115 1 

Tenn. 

Meurahis. .. 

105 

no 

115 

Tex. 

Dallas . 

115 

125 

135 


Houston. . . . . 

115 

125 

130 


San Antonio. .... 

125 

125 

135 

Wash. 

Seattle. ........ 

155 

175 

1 S 5 

Wis. 

Milwaukee (a)... 

135 

155 

155 ; 


(CB).. 

_ 

( 3 ) 

_ 

( 3 ) 

_ 

( 3 ) : 

L 


Total 

number 

of 

clerks 


Number of clerks receiving— 


4 ,lU 0 


15 
557 

68 

U4 

4 

28 

0 

90 

58 

57 

81 

84 

53 

99 

11 

6 

30 

18 

152 

1.516 

45 

22 

11 

1 

4 i 

25 

10 

20 

21 

20 

2 

1 6 
11 

2 

0 

9 


Less than 
$ 100.00 

$ 100 . 00 - 

109.35 

$ 110 . 00 - 

119.95 

$120.00- 

129.99 

$130.00- 

139.99 


169 

365 

508 

808 

5 


5 

3 



. 

5 

i 4 

VX> CM • 

• 

CM 

11 

. 

20 

. 

17 


15 

2 


5 

l6 

6 


17 

3 


1 6 

17 


26 

12 


8 

l 6 

35 . 


16 

15 

14 

26 


‘.' ^ 


1 


. 1 



...: 5 

...) 16 

8 

13 





9 

30 

11 

22 

8 


11 

16 

11 


7 

11 

11 

c 

15 

7 

4 

1 


1 

18 

69 

5 

12s 

295 

24 

i 5 


1 

3 
11 

4 
4 
8 


69 1 .. 


j 

10 

' 13 

20 

209 ... 



40 

. 27 

49 

139 ... 



, 45 


22 

39 i 

5 

1 7 

i ^9 

! 


10 1 

2 

' 3 

1 3 

1 1 

^ 1 

21 L.. 



.1 7 

, 7 

4 

20 [.. 



6 

1 9 

3 

17 t.. 



.1 4 

1 7 

2 

93 t... 



1 



12 |... 



.! 1 

, 2 



Ij Eepresents midpoint of intervale in which quartlles fall. Because of high concentration of salaries at intiltlples 
of $5 and. $ 10 , use of midpoints ma7 be overstatement of $5 for salaries classified by $10 Intervals and of from 
$5 to $10 for salaries classified by $20 intervals. 


58 



























































































































population, by State and amount of monthly ealary, for a pay-roll period ended December 31 • 19 ^ 3 '^ril 19 *^^ 


Kuaber of olerks reeeiTin^- 


$l 40 . 00 - 

149.99 

$150.00- 

159.99 

$160.00- 

165.59 

$170.00- 

179.99 

$ 180 . 00 - 

189.99 

— 

$190.00- 

195.99 

r - 1 

$200.00- 

219.95 

$220.00- 

239.99 

' $ 240,00 

1 or more 

434 

428 

257 

161 

723 

96 


66 

I . 

J_ 


1 



1 

.1. 

40 

g 

i 45 

4 

10 

16 

1 

16 

31 

6 

4 

5 

Q 

10 

l 4 

1 

.r * 

1 

1 

0 

1 

3 






33 

32 

91 

52 






State and city 


3 

7 

lU 

9 

5 

2 

8 
1 


3 

161 


20 

U 

2 

2 

3 

3 


9 

11 

U 

1 

1 


12 

10 

1 

1 

1 


i 4 

20 

93 

i 1 


38 

4 

4 

1 


1 

30 

3 


s 

646 


4 

31 

1 


1 

10 

17 

1 


2 

51 


Total 


' Ala. 

t Birminghum 

Calif. 2 / 

1 Los Angeles 

Colo. 

■ D.C. 

: Denver 

' Qa. 

t Atlanta 

. Ill. 

t Chicago 

i Ind. 

! Indianapolis 

1 Ky. 

: Louisville 

La. 

: New Orleans 

1 Md. 

: Baltimore 

' Mich. 

i Detroit 

/ Minn. 

! Minneapolis 

3 t. Paul 

Mo. 

! Kanaaa City 


St. Louie 

, N.J. 

! Jersey City (aB) 


N.Y. 


Ohio 


1.;**“::* : 





.;•••*'. 

..... .. 

1 

' 1 

..... ^ 

5:4,9 

23 i 8 1 26 

7 ' 17 ' 15 

9 1 1 

1 

! 

1 

j i 

3 j ^ 

9 i 9 

2 

9 



7 

.• ' ■ 1 

1 




.' S.I. 








1 












" !.1.:::::: 

2 

20 




- - 


l4 

6 

12 


1 j Wash 


0 ' T i 


1 





^ 1 5 !. 

1-! - - - 


L_1- 

1 


Newark (A 3 ) 

(C) 

Buffalo 
New York 
BuChester 

Clacinrati (a) 
(0 
(B) 
( 0 ) 

Cleveland (a) 
(C) 
(BO) 
( 0 ) 

Columbus (a) 
(C) 
(BO) 

Toledo (a) 

(C) 

(B) 

( 0 ) 

?or tlaud 
Philadelphia 
Pittsburgh 
Providence 
Memphis 
Dallas 
Fouston 
San antonio 
Seattle 
nilwaokse (a) 
(CB) 


2 / Data not available for offices serving cities of Oakland and San Francisco. See table I, footnote 4 , 
y Not computed; base less than 10 . 


59 










































































































Table IX.—Dietrlbutlon of field representatlTee In State piiblic aseletance agencies, by State and aBOunt of 
monthly salary, for a pay-roll period ended December 1945 -i‘Prll 30 t 1946 


state 

Interquartile range 
of salaries ij 

— 

Total 

number 

of 

field 

repre- 

sent- 

atires 

Number of field representatires receirlng— 

First 

queurtile 

Median 

Third 
quart!le 

Less 

than 

$ 200.00 

$ 200 . 00 i> 

219.99 

$ 220 . 00 . 

239.99 

$ 240 . 00 - 

259.99 

$260.00. 

279.99 

$ 280 , 00 - 

299.99 

$300,00- 

319.99 

$320.00 

or more 

Total... 

$230 

$250 

$290 

507 

57 

«3 

111 

97 

4 o 

46 

34 

39 

a .... 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

7 


3 

4 






kTi ........ 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

4 




\ 

2 

1 



Ark. 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

6 

3 

3 







Calif. 

250 

270 

31b 

62 



15 

12 

11 

3 

13 

g 

Colo....... 

(2) 

(2) 

(S 

9 


9 





Conn 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

3 




1 

1 


1 

. 

Del. (c)... 




0 









D.C. 




0 








. 

ria. 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

2 




2 





Ga. 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

g 

1 


1 

6 


. 


. 

Idaho. 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

4 



1 

3 

. 

. 


. 

Ill. 

250 

276 

290 

87 

39 

12 

21 

2 



. 


Ind. 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

4 



4 




Iowa. 

230 

250 

250 

11 




6 





Kans. 

230 

250 

250 

13 


1 

5 

7 





Xy. 

210 

2io 

210 

21 

1 

19 

1 






La. 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

g 




1 

R 

1 

1 

Mains. 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

1 



1 






Md. 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

5 




• 4 

1 




Mich. 

350 

370 

370 

18 







2 

16 

Minn. 

250 

270 

290 

11 




. 

3 

. 



Miss. 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

7 

3 

. 

4 







Mo. 

210 

230 

250 

16 


4 

5 

7 





Mont. 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

6 



2 

4 



. j . 

Nebr. 

230 

250 

250 

10 


. 

4 

5 

1 


_!_ 

Ner. 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

1 






. 

1 


N.H. 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

2 

1 

1 






N.J. (iB).. 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

5 


2 

3 

' 


N.J. (C)... 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

3 

3 





1 i 

N. Mei. 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

3 


1 

1 


.i “■ 



> 

N.T. 

290 

290 

2«K) 

38 




9 


23 


6 

N.C. 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

g 

1 

2 

4 

1 




N.Dalc. 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

6 


1 

3 

2 




. 

Ohio (▲)... 

210 

210 

230 

22 

2 

10 

10 






(BOO). 

230 

230 

230 

19 


4 

12 

2 

1 




Or eg. 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

2 



2 






Pa. 

310 

310 

330 

l 4 







^ 9 

R 

R.I. 

tz ) 

(2) 

(2) 

5 


1 

1 

3 





S.C. 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

6 



6 






S.Dafc. 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

2 

i 


1 






Tenn. 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

g 

2 

6 







Tex. 

270 

270 

270 

10 




1 

9 




Utah. 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

5 




2 

3 




Vt. (BO... 




b 









Ta. 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

9 



1 

g 





Wash. 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

6 






1 

2 

3 

W.Va. 



0 









Wis. 

(2) 

(2) 

(2) 

g 




a 

1 


R 


Wyo. 


(2) 

(2) 

2 



2 




J 



j (2) 






_ 


-1 

1 

_ 


1 / Bepresents midpoint of Interrale in idilch quartlles fall. Because of high concentration of salaries at multiples 
of and $ 10 , use of midpoints may bo orerotatement of $5 for salaries classified by $10 Interrals and of from 
$3 to $10 for salaries classified by $<^0 interrals. 

2 / Not computed; base less than 10 . 


60 - 
















































































































































































PERSONNEL IN LOCAL OFFICES 
OF STATE PUBLIC ASSISTANCE AGENCIES 
1946 


PART II. SIZE AND COMPOSITION 
OF LOCAL OFFICE STAFFS 


FEDERAL SECURITY AGENCY 
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION 
Bureau of Public Assistance 

Public Assistance Report No. 12 










i 

f 

} 


> 



*4 


I 


$ 


V 

j 

«•' 

*« 


I 

r- 





»» 


, » 

« 


*> 

I 

. f 

t 

'li 

/. 

/• 

• « 

V 

V ' 

I'- 


% 


**« 


/• 

m 

s 

.• 




I 

k 

♦ 


r 


1 

I 

i 




■> 


> I I 

r, 

'V ' 

I 


:k- 






PERSONNEL IN LOCAL OFFICES 


OF STATE PUBLIC ASSISTANCE AGENCIES 


19 4 6 


PART II. SIZE AND COMPOSITION 
OF LOCAL OFFICE STAFFS 


by 

Vivian B. Norman 
and 

Dorothy R. Bucklin 


Statistics and Analysis Division 
Bureau of Public Assistance 


Public Assistance Report No. 12 


FEDERAL SECURITT AGENCY 
Social Security Administration 
Vfeshington, D.C. 

April 194 s 















CONTENTS 


Introduction. 

Number and types of local offices and programs administered... 

Size of loceJ. office staffs. 

Composition of local office staffs. 

Part-time employees. 

Appendix tables. 

Definitions. 

Chart 1 . Distribution of local offices and employees by 

size of staff. 


TEXT TABLES 

1 . Local offices and employees in agencies administering 

specified groups of programs. 

2 . Comparison of number of coimties and number of local 

offices in agencies with noncounty administrative 
units. 

3 . Distribution of local offices and employees by size 

of staff. 

U. Small and large-office agencies. 

5 . Staffing patterns in local offices with one, two, three, 

or four full-time employees. 

6 . Number of full-time employees responsible to the director 

in local offices serving cities with a population of 
500,000 or more, by type of position. 

7 . Distribution of hi reporting offices serving cities of 

250,000 or more population, by average number of 
clerks for every 10 visitors. 

8 . Offices with supervisors. 

9. Average num-faer of visitors per supervisor In 25 agencies.. 

10 . Distribution of part-tljie emploTees, by type of position.. 



















APPENDIX TABLES 


Page 

I. Distribution of local offices, by State and number of 
full-time employees, for a pay-roll period ended 
December 31, 1945-April 30, 194^.. l8 

II. Number of local offices with one, two, three, or 
four full-time employees, by State and type of 
position for a pay-roll period ended December 31> 

1945-April 30, 1946. 20 

III. Number of full-time employees in local offices, by 
State and type of position for a pay-roll period 
ended December 31, 1945-April 30, 1946....... 22 

IV. Number of local offices with part-time employees 

and number of part-time employees and equivalent 
full-time of such employees, by State and type of 
position for a pay-roll period ended December 31> 

1945-April 30, 1946. 23 


>3 








INTRODUCTION 


Information on the number and types of personnel in each of 2,956 
local offices is available from the reports submitted by 49 State public 
assistance agencies in a study of salaries paid employees of local public 
assistance offices, conducted by tiie Bureau of Public Assistance early 
in 1946.ly The salary data were presented in Part I of the report on 
the study; this section—Part II—discusses the size and composition of 
local office staffs. 

Throughout Part II, as in Part I, the terms "agency" or "State 
agency" refer to the State agency responsible for administering assistance 
or for supervising the administration of assistance by local agencies. 

The terra "local office" designates both the local offices of a State 
agency administering assistance and the local agencies that administer 
assistance under the supervision of a State agency. A "local office" may, 
in areas of large population, maintain several branch or district offices; 
for piirposes of this study the staffs of all such offices were considered 
to comprise a single local office. For States having more than one State 
agency included in the study, the programs for which each agency is re¬ 
sponsible are identified by the letter A for old-age assistance, B for 
aid to the blind, C for aid to dependent children, and G for general 
assistance. 

Only employees on the pay roll are included in the analysis; 
vacant positions are not considered in either tlie size of the office or 
the staffing pattern. Since vacancies probably represent between 5 and 
10 percent of all established positions, the data reported may in some 
instances not show staffing as planned. They do show, however, the 
nmber of workers on the job and carrying out the functions of the local 
office at the time of the study. In general, therefore, the data may be 
said to represent usual staffing patterns. Because part-time employment 
is difficult to measure and is relatively insignificant, the analysis, 
unless otherwise indicated, is limited to full-time workers. Part-time 
workers, measured in full-time equivalents, represented only 1 percent 
of the total number of local office employees. 


Includes 4B State agencies and the District of Columbia. See appendix 
table I for detail on agencies participating in the study. Agencies 
administering the special types of public assistuice in Alaska, Hawaii, 
Massachusetts, and Oklahoma did not participate. In addition, the 
State agencies adn ini staring general assist-nnee in New Jersey and 
Oklahoma are not included in the study. Data on local office personnel 
engaged in the administration of general assistance are reasonably com¬ 
plete only for Ohio and Nev/ York and for the 21 States in vdiich, as 
shown in appendix table I, all local offices administering the special 
types of public assistance also administer general assistance. 


- 1 - 









NUMBER MB TIPES OF LOCAL OFFICES AND 
PROGRAMS ADMINISTERED 


The special types of public assistance are usually administered by 
local offices serving a county area. Thus, of the 3»272 local offices ^ 
administering one or more of these programs, 2,695 (about 82 percent) 
operate on a county-wide basis.^ Of the other offices, 478 or 15 percent 
serve areas smaller than a county unit, i.e., cities or towns or districts 
including several cities or towns; 93 or 3 percent serve areas comprising 
more than one county; and one office serves the District of Columbia. 

Though data on the number and types of local offices engaged in 
the administration of general assistance are incomplete, it is known that 
the county is the usxial administrative imit in most States. For the 
country as a lAiole, however, the many cities, towns, or townships adminis¬ 
tering this program in a dozen or so States far outnumber the county units 
that are typical of most States. 

The very considerable extent to which administration of the three 
special types of public assistance has been imified in local offices is 
shown in table 1. About four-fifths of the 2,956 local offices included 
in this study administer these three programs in combination, end about 
half ^ also administer general assistance as well. Programs other than 
these four major types of assistance are exiministered by a large propor¬ 
tion of the local offices, but information on the other programs was not 
collected as part of this study. 

The number of local offices through fhich the State*s public 
assistance programs are administered is a factor of considerable im¬ 
portance in obtaining imiform administration of the programs. Other 
things being equal, the larger the number of local offices, the more com- 
^ plex and costly becomes the problem of securing uniform interpretation 
and application of State-wide standards. More than half the State 


7j This is the total for the country as a idiole. Of tiie 2,956 offices 
included in the study, 122 administer general assistance only, 3 admin¬ 
ister veterans* assistance. The total of 3>272 includes, therefore, 
2,831 local offices reported in this study as administering one or more 
of the special types of public assistance, and in addition, 5 non¬ 
participating county offices in California, and 436 offices in juris¬ 
dictions not participating in the study, viz., Alaska with 4 district 
offices, Hawaii with 4 county offices, Massachusetts with 351 city or 
town offices, and Oklahoma Tdth 77 county offices. 

Most (2,308) of these county offices administer all 3 of the special 
types of public assistance, and 1,464 of them also administer general 
assistance. 

ij Includes 1,006 offices in agencies with ABCG in all offices, 491 of 
793 offices in agencies administering ABC in all offices and G in some, 
and 42 offices of the New York agency administering the 4 programs in 
combination. 


- 2 - 














agencies—26 of 4S—^have more than 50 offices. For most State agencies, 
the n\ 3 inber of coiJnties in the State determines the number of offices, 
end tvio-thirds of the agencies operate only throi^gh county opices. Xet 
even among the State agencies operating only on a county basis, 6 States— 
Georgia, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Missouri, and North Carolina—have 100 
or more local offices. In addition. New York, Ohio (BCG), and Virginia, 
with both city and county offices, have more thnn 100 
The local offices in these 9 States represent about two-^iiths of all 
local offices included in this study. 


Table 1.—Local offices and employees in agencies 
administering specified groups of programs 


Programs 
administered 1/ 

Himiber 

Of 

agencies 

Offices 

Full-time employees^ 

Number 

percentage 

distribution 

Number 

Percentage 

distribution 

Total.••••«• 

49 

2,956 

lOO.C 

2/31,970 

100.0 

ABC in all offices.. 

40 

2,363 

79.9 

21,412 

67.0 

G in all offices.. 

21 

1,006 

34.0 

11,443 

35.S 

G in some offices. 

10 

793 

26.8 

5,232 

16.4 

G in no offices... 

9 

564 

19.1 

4,737 

14 .^ 

Other combinations 

9 

593 

20.1 

10,558 

33.0 


C. aid to de- 


"U A represents old-age assistance; B, aid to the blind; 

pendent children, and G, general assistance. 

^ Excludes 152 child welfare v.'orkers in offices separate from those 
administering public assistance. ^ . j.- 

3/ Local offices administer one to four tjnes in various combinations. 
Includes the following agencies: Delaware (C), Missouri, Nevaaa, 
Jersey (AB and C), New York, Ohio (A and BCG), and VerLiont. 


New 


The State agencies in viiich some or all local offices serve ^ 
area either larger or smaller tlian a county are shov.n in ^ble 2. ^i. 

group of 16 agencies includes 3—New York, Ohio (EGG), and Bhode Isl^d 
in which the local offices greatly exceed the nmber of counties in the 
State. On the other hand, Florida, Texas, and ^^est Virginia, eu.ch with 
a large number of counties, have district offices serving an area larger 
than a county; in these States, therefore, the number of locad offices 
is small relative to the number of counties. 


- 3 - 



























Table 2.—Comparison of number of counties and number of local 
offices in agencies with noncounty administrative units \/ 


State 

agency 

Programs 

administered 

u 

Number 

of 

coimties 

Number of 
local 
offices 

Type of 
office 

Connecticut... 

ABC 

8 

4 

District 

Florida...•••. 

ABC 

67 

12 

District 

Idaho.. 

ABCG 2/ 

45 

30 

County ij 

LouivSiana. •«.. 

ABCG 

64 

61 

Parish ij 

Maine•••••»••• 

ABC 

16 

22 

District 

Montana....... 

ABCG 

57 

49 

County y 

Nevada... 

A 

17 

9 

District 

New Hampshire. 

ABC 

10 

7 

District 

New Jersey (C) 

C 

21 

13 

District ^ 

New York...... 

ABCG ^ 

62 

2/128 

City and county 

Ohio (BCG).... 

BCG ^ 

88 

207 

City and county 

Rhode Island.. 

ABCG 

5 

33 

Tov/n 

South Dakota.. 

ABCG i/ 

68 

53 

County y 

Texas.. 

ABC 

254 

40 

District 

Vermont. 

BC 

U 

9 

District 

West Virginia. 

ABCG 

55 

8 

District 


1/ Excludes Massachusetts (with 351 city and town units) viiich did not 
participate in the study and Virginia, which has county-wide adminis¬ 
tration in all 99 counties, city-wide administration in the 23 in¬ 
dependent cities which are not part of any coionty, and one office 
serving a county and city combined. 

2j A signifies old-age assistance; B, aid to the blind; C, aid to de¬ 
pendent children; and G, general assistance. 

^ General assistance in some offices only. 

Ij Some offices serve areas incliiding more than one county. 

J/ About half are one-county districts. 

^ Offices administer prograjns in various combinations. 

2J In addition, there are local offices (mostly town agencies) for 
which data were not available; these offices serve about 1 percent 
of the State*s case load. 























SIZE OF LOCAL OFFICE STAFFS 


Local public assistance offices vary greatly in the number of 
workers employed* Some have a staff of several himdred, but most have 
very small staffs. More than half the 2,956 offices included in this 
study had less than 5 fiill-time workers and about 80 percent had less 
than 10. Seventy-three offices were operated by part-time workers only.^ 

Thoiigh small offices predominate, the great majority of public 
assistance employees work in large offices. Thus, three-fourths of all 
local office personnel are needed to staff the large offices—those with 
10 or more employees—^which comprise only a fifth of all offices (table 
3 and chart 1). About one-sixth of all local office employees work in 
New York City—4>000—and Los Angeles—^1,328. 


Table 3*—Distribution of local offices and 
employees by size of staff 


Number of 
full-time 
employees 

Offices 

Full-time 

employees 

Number 

Percentage 

distribution 

Number 

Percentage 

distribution 

Total... 

2,956 

100.0 

1/31,970 

100.0 

None 7j . 

93 

3.1 

0 

0 

1. 

276 

9.3 

276 

.9 

2. 

520 

17.6 

1,040 

3.3 

3. 

4S9 

16.5 

1,467 

4.6 

4. 

282 

9.5 

1,128 

3.5 

5. 

236 

8.0 

1,180 

3.7 

6-9. 

474 

16.0 

3,394 

10.6 

10-49. 

527 

17.8 

10,066 

31.5 

50 or more. 

59 

2.0 

13,419 

42.0 


\J Excludes 152 child welfare workers for whom information 
on size of office was not comparable. 

TJ Part-time employees only, or all positions vacant as of 
date of report. 


All but 4 agencies—Connecticut, Florida, New Jersey (C), and 
West Virginia—reported some small offices, i.e., offices with less than 
10 employees. The proportion of small offices, however, is much larger 
in some agencies than in others. In table agencies in which less than 


^ Appendix table I shows the number of offices of each specified size, 
by agency. 


786386 0 - 48 -2 


- 5 - 

























CHART I. 

DISTRIBUTION OF LOCAL OFFICES AND EMPLOYEES BY SIZE OF STAFF 


OFFICES 

PERCENT OF ALL OFFICES 


NUMBER OF 
FULL TIME 
EMPLOYEES 


20 10 0 0 


EMPLOYEES 

PERCENT OF ALL FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES 

10 20 30 40 


50 



1 

2 

3 

4-5 

6-9 

10-49 

50 OR 
MORE 



one-fifth of the locel offices employ 10 or more workers are classified 
as small-office agencies, sjid those in which a fifth or more of the of¬ 
fices employ 10 or more workers, as large-office agencies,^ Included 
among the 27 small-office agencies are 5—Delaware (C), Nevada, North 
Dakota, Vermont, end T?vyomlng—in which all offices had less than 10 
employees. 

The size of local office staffs reflects the combined effect of 
many factors. Even factors that obviously influence the size of staff, 
such as population and population density, cannot be isolated and their 
influence separately appraised. Similarly it is impossible to determine 
the effect on size of staff and the standards of work each agency expects 
to maintain; of the varying numbers of ?/orkers, depending on their com¬ 
petence, that are required to meet a specified standard of work, and of 
the amount of funds available for salaries. Consideration of these factors 
would underlie an agency*s decision as to the number of cases each worker 
would be expected to carry." The following discussion, therefore, is con¬ 
fined to an enumeration of the more obvious factors, with illustrations, 
drawn from the study, of their probable effect on size of local office 
staffs. 


^ This criterion for classifying agencies resulted in a division of 
the agencies included in the study into two groups of approximately 
equal size. 






























Table 4*—Small and large-office agencies \J 


Small-office agencies 

Large-office agencies 

Agency 

NiJmber of offices * 

Agency 

Number 

of offices 

Total 

10 or more 
employees 

Total 

10 or more 
employees 

Total, 27 



Total, 21 



agencies. 

1,968 

U5 

agencies. 

987 

440 

AT 

67 

6 

Ariz....... 

14 

4 

Ark. 

75 

1 

Calif.2/... 

53 

26 

Del.(c).«.# 

3 

0 

Colo.. 

63 

13 

Ga. 

159 

7 

Cnnn 

4 

4 

Xnflho*.t r « « 

30 

3 

Fla. 

12 

12 

Towa....... 

99 

s 

HI... 

102 

37 

Kan s....... 

105 

13 

Ind. 

92 

24 


120 

1 

La. 

61 

26 

Minn. 

87 

14 

Maine...... 

22 

5 

Ml KS. 

82 

3 

Md. 

24 

11 

Mn. 

115 

15 

Mich. 

83 

22 


49 

3 

N.E. 

7 

4 

^ . 

Nebr. 

93 

2 

N.J.(AB)... 

21 

16 

Nev.. •«.••• 

9 

0 

(C).... 

13 

13 


32 

4 

N.T . 

128 

75 

..... 

N.C . 

100 

12 

Ohio( a).... 

88 

27 

N.Pfilc. 

53 

0 

Pa. 

67 

50 

Ohio(BCG).. 

207 

12 

S.C. 

46 

10 

nT»c»cr___ 

36 

5 

Tex........ 

40 

33 

R.T.. 

38 

5 

Wash. ...... 

39 

20 



7/.Va . 

8 

8 

S.Dak . 

58 

1 




Tenn. •••••• 

95 

4 




Utah . 

29 

3 




Vt . 

9 

0 




Va . 

123 

9 




Wis . 

72 

U 




Wyo........ 

23 

0 





Agencies in ^ich less than one-fifth of the local offices employ 10 or 
more workers are classified as small—office agencies, and those in which 
one-fifth or more of the local offices employ 10 or more workers are 
classified as large-office agencies. Exclxides District of Columbia. 

2/ Excludes data for 5 counties^ see appendix table footnote 4* 


- 7 - 



























































Size of staff obviously is related to the number of people living 
in the area served. Most local public assistance offices serve areas 
corresponding to established minor civil divisions, such as counties, 
cities, or towns, which differ widely in population size. For this 
reason, staff requirements vary more widely than they would if each office 
served an area comprising about the same .population. 

Density of population may also be a factor affecting size of staff. 
Local offices in densely populated areas should be able to serve rela¬ 
tively more people with the same number of employees because the propor¬ 
tion of staff time spent in travel should be less, and greater speciali¬ 
zation and attendant economy in the performance of local office functions 
should be possible. Population per square mile in the 46 States included 
in the study ranges from 1,0 in Nevada to almost 700 in Rhode Island, 
Arizona and Colorado, both large-office agencies serving areas with 
relatively small pop^ations, are below average in population density. 

Variations in the proportion of the population in receipt of 
assistance in areas with the same total population also influence the 
size of staff, Unfortmately data showing the effect of such variations 
on size of staff are not available. Moreover, funds to provide the staff 
required may be a factor of some importance. Thus, three of the lowest 
income States—Alabama,,Mississippi, and North Carolina—have relatively 
small offices despite the relatively large population served. In addition, 
case loads per individual employee are above average in these States. 

Limited program coverage may account for small offices in some 
areas with large populations. For example, the Delaware Board of Welfare, 
which administers aid to dependent children and child welfare services 
only, and the Ohio Division of Social Administration (BCG), with some 
offices responsible for only one program, have small offices serving 
areas with relatively large populations. 


- 8 - 


COIJPOSITION OF LOCAL OFFICE STAFFS 


Einployees in local public assistance offices include those 
classified in one of four major groups—director, supervisor, visitor, 
and clerk. In addition, some local offices reported employees in other 
classifications, such as technician, administrative assistant, spe¬ 
cialist, or maintenance and custodial worker. The number of full-time 
employees in each of these five groups 2/ was as follof^s: 


Type of 
Dosition 1/ 

Number 

Percentage 

distribution 

Total.... 

32.122 

100.0 

Director.... 

2,657 

8.3 

Supervisor,• 

1,675 

5.2 

Visitor...•. 

U,819 

46.1 

Clerk... 

11,635 

36.2 

Other.. 

1,336 

4.2 


1/ For definition of each type of 
worker, see page 24 , 


Directors, visitors, end clerks are found in most offices, super¬ 
visors and other workers, in relatively few. Offices without employees 
in each of the three most common positions are, with fev; exceptions, veiy 
small. These ver^’- small offices, i.e,, those vdth less than five full¬ 
time employees, represent more than half the total. Staffing patterns 
in these offices are summarized in table 5* 

There is considerable uniformity among States in the types of 
positions filled by full-time employees in these small offices. Usually 
the one-person office includes a director; the tw’o-person office, a 
director and clerk; the three-person office, a director, visitor, and 
clerk; and the four-person office, a director with either tv/o visitors 
and a clerk or two clerks and a visitor. Kentucky is the only State 
with many small offices that showed an entirely different pattern; it 
had no director or clerical position in any local office. In most States, 
deviation from the usual staffing pattern probably resulted from vacan¬ 
cies. 


Most offices have a director as the responsible head. About 90 
percent of the 2,956 offices included in the study employed a full-time 
director. About a third of the offices without a full-time director had 
a part-time director; such offices were scattered among 14 States. 


7/ Appendix table III shows the number of full-time workers in each 
classification, by agency. For number of part-time employees in 
these positions, see page 16. 

^ Appendix table II show^s the classification of fiill-time employees 
of one, two, three, and four-person offices, by agency. 


- 9 - 




















Most of the remaining offices with no director were in the three agen¬ 
cies—Delaware (C), Kentucky, and Vermont—that do not provide for thas 
position in any local office, ^ The rest of the offices without a 
director presumably had vacant positions. 10/ 


Table 5.—Staffing patterns in local offices with one, 
two, three, or four full-time employees 


Size of office 
and type of position 

Offices 

Number 

Percentage 

distribution 

Onp—•nf'.rsnn of flee, , 

177 

100.0 

Director.«.... . 

64.1 

Visitor.«... . . 

65 

23.6 

Clerk. 

33 

12.0 

Other. 

1 

.4 

Two—person office.**. 

^20 

406 

100.0 

Director-clerk.•**•. 

78.1 

Director-visitor..*..*..*,•. 

56 

10.8 

Visitor-clerk.•.•*•••.*•.••« 

20 

3.8 

Other combinations. 

38 

7.3 

Three—person office 

489 

403 

100.0 

Director-visitor-clerk. 

82.4 

Director-2 clerks.... 

39 

8.0 

2 visitors-1 clerk.......,,. 

14 

2.9 

Other combinations.. 

33 

6.7 

Four-person office 

282 

100.0 

Director-2 visitors-l clerk. 

U5 

51.4" 

Director-1 visitor-2 clerks. 

103 

36.5 

Other combinations,... 

34' 

12.1 


In these States, the programs are State-administered. In Kentuclcy 
more than half the local offices have only one employee; in the 
offices vath more than one employee, it is possible that one staff 
member may carry responsibility that in other States would be 
assimied by an employee ctctually classified as a director. In 
Delawai'e and Vermont the number of local offices is small; becauvse 
the States also are small, it seems likely that direction is sup¬ 
plied through State office personnel, 

10 / Appendix table III shows the nuEiber of full-time directors reported 
by each agency. 


- 10 - 





































Approximately a fourth of the directors either worked alone or 
had only a clerical staff. More than 90 percent of those directors 
were in the one or two-person offices of 32 State agencies,11/ At the 
other extreme, a few directors had office staffs of hundreds of workers 
in many different types of positions (table 6), 


Table 6,—^Niimber of full-time employees responsible to the 
director in local offices serving cities with a population 
of 500,000 or more, by type of position 


1 City served 

Number of full-time employees 

Total 

Supervisors 

Visitors 

Clerical 

workers 

Others 

y 

New York,,,,,.. 

3,999 

272 

1,865 

1,516 

346 

Los Angeles,**#.**,,. 

1,327 

83 

553 

557 

134 

Chicago, 

685 

59 

356 

245 

25 

Philadelphia.... 

560 

43 

270 

209 

■ 38 

Pittsburgh,,,,•*,,,,« 

442 

45 

208 

139 

50 

Buffalo,••**,.,,. 

395 

33 

183 

152 

Z1 

St, Louis,,,.. 

281 

28 

146 

99 

8 

Detroit. 

222 

22 

140 

57 

3 

Baltimore. 

221 

27 

120 

58 

16 

District of Columbia. 

115 

9 

49 

44 

13 

Milwaukee (A),,.,,,.. 

35 

2 

20 

12 

1 

(BC). 

16 

0 . 

10 

6 

0 

Cleveland (A).**•..,. 

82 

5 

49 

25 

3 

(C). 

43 

5 

26 

10 

2 

1 (BG). 

50 

4 

22 

20 

4 

' (G). 

46 

4 

18 

21 

3 


"y Includes administrative assistants, technicians, specialists, and main¬ 
tenance and custodial workers. 


Visitors were employed by local offices of all State agencies 12/ 
and represented the largest group of workers in most offices. Neverthe¬ 
less, a fourth of the local offices, usually the one or two-person office 
in which a director-w'orker performed the social work activities, included 
no fiill-time visitors, 12/ 


11/ See appendix table II for number of offices, by agency, in which the 
director had only clerical staff, 

12/ Appendix table III shows the nimiber of full-time y/orkers in each 
classification, by agency, 

13/ Appendix table II shows positions in one and two-person offices, by 
agency. 


- 11 - 

































Most offices with full-time visitors also employed clerical per¬ 
sonnel. Only 15 percent of the offices had no full-time clerical help, 
and less'than 2 percent of the visitors were in these offices. About 
a fourth of such offices and a large proportion of the visitors in such 
offices were in Kentucky. Most of the others were "director-only" of¬ 
fices in other States. For each full-time visitor there was, for all 
agencies combined, less than one full-time clerk; more precisely, there 
were 8 clerks for every 10 visitors. Data for the large-city offices 
illustrate the extent to which individual offices differed in providing 
clerical help (table 7). 

Table 7.--Distribution of i^l reporting offices serving cities 
of 250,000 or more population, by average number of clerks 
for every 10 visitors l/ 


Clerks 
per 10 
visitors 

Number 

of 

offices 

City served 

0. 

1 

Louisville 

k . 

3 

Cleveland(C), Detroit, Memphis 

5. 

k 

Baltimore, Birminj^am, Cleveland(A), 
Indisnapolis 

6. 

8 

Cincinnati(A), Columbus(A), Dallas, 
Houston, Kansas City, Milwaukee(A; 
and BC), Newark(C) 

7. 

8 

Chicago, Minneapolis, Pittsburgh, 
Providence, St. Louis, San Antonio, 
Seattle, Toledo(A) 

8. 

6 

Atlanta, Buffalo, Jersey City(AB), 

New York, Philadelphia, Portland 

9. 

2 

Cleveland(BG), District of Columbia 

10. 

2 

Los Angeles, New Orleans 

11. 

3 

Clncinnati(C), Newark(AB), Rochester 

12. 

3 

Cleveland(G), Denver, St. Paul 

20. 

1 

Cincinnatl(G) 


1 / Excludes Cincinnati (B), Columbus (C and BG), Jersey City (C), 
and Toledo (B, C, and G)—all offices that employed less than 
10 visitors. 


More than half of these large-city offices averaged 6 to 8 clerks 
for every 10 visitors. Extremes above and below the average probably re¬ 
flected some differences in responsibilities of local offices as well as 
different staffing policies among State agencies. Vacancies also may have 
acco\mted for some of the variation. Within agencies, however, ratios 
were usuedly similar. For example, in Ohio the local offices of the 
Division of Aid for the Aged serving Cincinnati, Cleveland, Columbus, and 
Toledo had fewer clerks than visitors, whereas in the Division of Social 


12 - 





















Administration, fliiich has several small offices serving each area, 
clerks usiially were more nvimerous than visitors. The Philadelphia- 
Pittsburgh, Kansas City-St. Louis, and Dallas-Houston-San Antonio 
offices as groups, were similarly staffed. On the other hand, marked 
differences in the ratio of clerks and visitors existed between Minne¬ 
apolis and St. Paul and bet?/een the local offices administering old-age 
assistance and aid to the blind in Jersey City and Newark. 

Personnel classified as supervisors are for the most part employed 
only in a few large offices. For the purpose of this study, the class 
of supervisor was defined to include only employees whose major function 
is the supervision of either visitors or other supervisors of visitors. 

To the extent that supervision is provided by other personnel, such as 
a State field representative, or a director or senior case worker, the 
data on number of supervisors understate the amount of supervision in 
local offices. 


Table 8.—Offices with supervisors 


Agency 

Number of 
local offices 

Agency 

Number of 
locsil offices 

Total 

With 

siQ>ervisors 

Total 

With 

supervisors 

Total 1/ 

2.603 

440 




Ala. 

67 

5 

Mo. 

115 

7 

Ariz-f..... 

14 

2 

Nebr...... 

93 

2 

Ark. 

75 

1 

N.H. 

7 

2 

Calif .^... 

53 

23 

N.J.(AB).. 

21 

15 

Colo«#•.••• 

63 

8 

(0... 

13 

12 

Conn « . t . . ^ 

4 

4 

N.Mex..... 

32 

2 

Del.(C).... 

3 

1 

N.I. 

128 

65 

D.O. 

1 

1 

N.C. 

100 

10 

Fla. 

12 

12 

Ohio(A)... 

88 

8 

Ga. 

159 

4 

(BCG). 

207 

13 

Til. 

102 

33 

Oreg.•••. • 

36 

1 

Tnd. 

92 

19 

Pa. 

67 

47 

Town.. .t r t t 

99 

4 

R.I. 

38 

9 

K^rS « t t r r r t 

105 

8 

s.c. 

46 

5 

Kv. 

120 

6 

Tenn..•••• 

95 

4 

La. 

61 

20 

Utah.••.•• 

29 

3 

Mn 

22 

7 

Va........ 

123 

9 

. 

24 

6 

Wash 

39 

23 

Mi ch ^ f ^ . 

83 

21 

W.Va. 

8 

8 

Minn. 

87 

4 

Wis. 

72 

6 


\J Excludes 353 offices in 9 States with no supervisors in local offices: 
Idaho, Mississippi, Montana, Nevada, North Dakota, South Dakota, 

Texas, Vermont, Wyoming. 

7j Excludes data for 5 counties; see appendix table I, footnote 4. 

- 13 - 





















































The 440 offices with supervisors represented about a sixtli of all 
offices. Table 8 shows the distribution of offices, by agency. More than 
half the 1,675 supervisors reported were attached to the few offices with 
100 or more employees, and only a fifth, to those frith less than 25 * 1^/ 
California, Illinois, New York, Pennsylvania, and Washington, the five 
States with the largest numbers of supervisors, employed three-fifths of the 
total. New York alone employed 469* 15/ Connecticut, Florida, and West 
Virginia, which are organized on a district basis, had supervisors in all 
local offices. At the other extreme, nine States had no supervisor in any 
of their 353 local offices. 

Some differences in supervisors* responsibilities are shown by 
their number in relation to the number of visitors in the same offices 
(table 9). The combined average was six visitors per supervisor. 

Table 9*—Average number of visitors per 
supervisor in 25 agencies 1/ 


Visitors 

per 

si^rvisor 

2 / 

Agency 

L . 

Minn., Ohio (BCG), Utah 

Ga., La., Md., Mo., N.J.(AB), 
Pa., Wash. 

Calif., Colo., Ill., Kans., 
Mich., N.Y., R.I., Va. 

Ind., Maine, N.C. 

Fla., Oreg. 

N.H. (C) 

Ohio (A) 

5... 

6. 

7 .. 

S .. 

q... . 

10.*••.••••••• 



\J Agencies with at least 10 supervisors. 
Average number of visitors in offices with 
supervisors. 


l4/ The position of supervisor is not usually found in the staffing 
pattern of local offices until the number of full-time employees 
reaches 13* Thus, of the offices with fewer than 10 employees, 
less than 2 percent had supervisors; of those with 10-12 employees, 
the proportion with supeindsors ranged from a fourth to a third; 
among the 13-person offices, however, more than two-thirds had 
supervisors. 

15 / Appendix table III shows the number of full-time workers in each 
classification, by agency. 


- U - 














PART-TIME MPLOYEES 


Part-time employees meet only a small part of local office staff¬ 
ing needs. Measured in full-time equivalents, they represented only 1 
percent of the total number of local office employees and were employed 
by less than a fourth of all local offices. 16 / 

Ten 17/ of the 49 agencies had no part-time workers, and a 
majority of the 39 agencies with some part-time personnel employed them 
in only a few local offices. Only one agency, the Delaware Board of 
Welfare with 3 locsil offices, had part-time workers in each local of¬ 
fice .18/ ^ The status of offices with respect to part-time employment 
was as follows: 


Total... 

No part-time employees.. 
Some part-time employees 
Part-time employees only 


Local offices 


Number 

Percentage 

distribution 

1 / 2 , 9?6 

100 

2,275 

78 

588 

20 

73 

2 


3^ Excludes 20 offices in which all positions 
were reported vacant. 


The 863 part-time workers reported were equivalent to approx¬ 
imately 391 full-time workers (table 10). Though they comprised 3 
percent of all employees, their time on the job represented only 1 per¬ 
cent of total staff time. 

Many of the part-time employees reported were in the miscel- 
laneoiis "other” classification, which includes the specialists and main¬ 
tenance and custodial workers. This group, however, represented less than 
one-fifth of the part-time staff measured in terms of full-time equivalents 
(table 10 ). Twenty agencies included workers in this group; Louisiana, 
Maine, and New Mexico employed local office staff on a part-time basis 
in only IJiese miscellaneoiis classifications. 


16 / Part-time employees include both those working part time and those 
working on a part-time basis in more than one office whose com¬ 
bined time amounted to a full-time job. 

17 / Alabama, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Idaho, Michigan, New 
Jersey(C), Ohio(A), South Carolina, West Virginia, Wyoming. 

18/ Appendix table IV shows part-time employees in each classification, 
by agency. 


- 15 - 













Table 10.—Distribution of part-time employees by type of position 


Type of 
position 

Full-time 

employees 

Part-time employees 

Total 

number 

Full-time equivalents 

Number 

Percent¬ 
age dis¬ 
tribution 

Percent 
of all 
employees 

Total 

32,122 

1/ 863 

391 

100,0 

1.2 

Director... 

2,657 

99 

U 

11.3 

1.6 

Supervisor. 

1,675 

17 

9 

2.3 

.5 

Visitor..•• 

H,319 

231 

116 

29.7 

.3 

Clerk...... 

11,635 

303 

150 

33.4 

1.3 

Other.. 

1,336 

1/ 213 

72 

18.4 

5.1 


\J Excludes 94 part-time workers for whom information on full-time equiv¬ 
alents was not available. See appendix table IV, footnote 2. 


Only five agencies—California, Maryland, Ohio (BCG), Oregon, and 
Washington—reported some part-time workers in each of the major classes 
of positions. The number of agencies with part-time workers in each 
specified classification was as follo7/s; 


Type of Number of agencies 

position with part-time workers 


Directors.... 14 

Supervisor... 9 

Visitor. 29 

Clerk... 34 

Other.20 


Of the usual local office positions—that is, the four major 
classes, excluding those in the miscellaneous ’’other” group—the clerical 
position was the one most frequently filled by part-time employees. 

More agencies employed such workers, and the largest number of part-time 
personnel was in this group, which totaled almost half the part-time 
employees in the four groups. Texas made the most use of part-time 
clerical staff; about a fifth of all these workers were in the Texas 
offices. Part-time clerks accounted for nearly 10 percent of all clerical 
time in that agency and were employed in about half the offices. 


Visitors represented a little more than a third of the four major 
classes of positions filled by part-time workers. Almost a thii^i of the 
part-time visitors were in Kentucky where they represented more than 10 
percent of total visitor time. All these visitors, however, were 


- 16 - 























actually full-time employees who worked part time in more than one local 
office. Seventy-two of the 120 local offices in Kentucky had some part- 
time visitors, including 12 in which they were the only persons in the 
office* 


Tliere were relatively few part-time local office directors—only 
99 in 14 agencies. Two-thirds of the part-time directors were in three 
agencies—^Nebraska, Ohio (BCG), and Washington* 

Seventy-three offices operated with part-time workers only* For 
the most part, these workers were classified as visitors or directors* 
Offices in Kentuclcy, Nebraska, and Ohio (BCG) accounted for about three- 
fourths of the total; there were a few others in each of eight other 
States—California, Colorado, Montana, Nevada, North Dakota, Oregon, 
Utah, and Virginia* 


- 17 - 


Table I.—Distribution of loc^l offices, by 


State and number of full-time 


State 

Agency 


Administering 1/ 

Type of loc&l office 

‘fhree 

special 

General assistance 

ty u e s o f 
public 
aeeiet”* 
ance 2/ 

All 

local 

offices 

Some 

local 

offices 







Alabama 

Department of Public Welfare 

County 

X 

X 


Arisona 

Department of Social Security and Welfare 

County 

X 

X 


Arkansas 

Department of Public Welfare 

County 

X 

X 


California 

Department of Social Welfare 

County 

X 

X 


Colorado 

Department of Public Welfare 

County 

X 

X 


Connecticut 

Office of Commissioner of Welfare: 






Division of Public Assistance 

District ^ 

X 



Delaware 

Board of Welfare 

County 

C only 



District of Columbia 

Board of Public Welfare: 






Public Assistance end Children's Services 

City 

X 

X 


Florida 

Welfare Board 

District ^ 

X 


X 

Georgia 

Department of Public Welfare 

County 

X 



Idaho 

Department of Public Assistance 

County 6/ 

X 


X 

Illinois 

Public Aid Commission 

County 

X 



ludiazia 

Department of Public Welfare 

County 

X 



Iowa 

Department of Social Welfare 

Co’inty 

X 


X 

iCansas 

Department of Social Welfexs 

County 

X 

X 


Kentucky 

Department of Public Welfare: 






Division oi' Pxibllc Auolstance 

Cox:nt7 

X 



Louisiana 

Department of Public Welfare 

Farleh ^ 

X 

X 


Maine 

Departz&ent of Health and Welfare 

District ^ 

X 



Maryland 

Department of Public Welfare 

County 

X 

X 


Michigan 

Denartment of Social Welfare 

County 

X 


X 

Minnesota 

Department of Social Security: 






Division of Social Welfare 

County 

X 


X 

Mississippi 

Department of Public Welfare 

County 

X 



Missouri 

Social Security Commission 

County 

A&C 

X 


Montana 

Department of Public Welfare 

County 6/ 

X 

X 


Nebra(d:a 

Department of Assistance and Child Welfare 

County 

X 


X 

Nevada 

Welfare Department: 






Division of Old Age Assistance 

District 5/ 

A only 



New Hampshire 

Department of Public Welfare 

District 5/ 

X 



Mew Jersey 

Department of Institutions and Agencies: 






Division of Old Age Assistance 

County 






D1 a t.r 1 r t. ^ 

C nnly 



New Mexico 

Deoartment of Public Welfare 

County 

X 

X 


New York 

Department of Social Welfare 

County and city 

77 X 


V X 

North Carolina 

Board of Public Welfare ^ 

County 

X 


X 

North Dakota 

Public Welfare Board 

County 

X 

X 


Ohio 

Department of Public Welfare; 







County 

A only 




Division of Social Administration 

County and city ^ 

6 / Mc' 


^ X. 

Oregon 

Public Welfare Commission 

County 

X 

X 


Pennsylvania 

Department of Public Assistance 

County 

X 

X 


Hhode Island 

Department of Social Welfare: 






Division of Public Assistance 

Town 

X 

X 


South Carolina 

Denartment of Public Welfare 

County 

X • 

X 


South Dakota 

Department of Social Security 

County ^ 

X 


X 


Dflpart.tnfint. nf Public Welfare 

County 

X 




Deoartment of Public W'elfare 

District 5/ 

X 



Utah 

Department of Public Welfare 

County 

X 

X 



Department of Public W'elfare 

District 5/ 

B<^C 



Virginia 

Department of Public Welfare 

County and city 

X 

X 


Washington 

Department of Social Security 

County 

X 

X 


West Virginia 

Department of Public Assistance 

District 5/ 

X 

X 


Wisconsin 

Department of Public Welfare: 






Division of Public Assistance 

County 

a/ X 


X 

Wyoming 

Depfirtment of Public Welfare 

County 

X 

X 



1/ In addition to programs specified, staff of most offices spend some time on the administration of other welfare programs. 

?.! a signifies old-age assistance; B, aid to the blind; C, aid to dependent children. 

3/ Part-time employees only or all positions vacant as of date of report. 

^ Excludes offices in alameda, Sacramento, San Diego, San Francisco, and Santa Clara Counties which serve about one-fifth of the 
State's case load. 

*)/ For Connecticut, MrJ.ne, New Hampshire, and Vermont, the office serves an area ordinarily comprising several cities and towns. 
For all other States, "district" is used to designate those offices ordinarily serving an area cooiprising more than one 
county; in the Hew Jersey Board of Children's Guardians half the district offices serve only one county. 


18 






































































er.ployees, for a pay-roll period ended December 31. 19^5-A.pril 3®. 19^6 


Total 

number 

of 

local 


Number 

of local offices with specified number of full-time employees 



Less than 6 






50 

and 

over 

State 

offices 

reported 

Total 

None 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6-9 

10-14 

15-19 

20-24 

25-49 


2.996 

1.896 

93 

276 

520 

489 

282 

236 

474 

243 

91 

60 

133 

59 

Total 

67 

14 

46 



4 

18 

13 

3 

11 

11 

15 

3 

3 

2 . 

1 

1 , 


1 

iilabama 

7 




3 

40 

1 


1 . 


1 

Aritona 

75 
‘♦Z 53 

63 

66 



9 

6 

8 . 



1 



Aricansas 

23 

4l 

1 

2 

f 

I*. 

7 

17 

5 

4 

3 

6 

5 

2 

4 

9 

5 

6 

7 

3 

3 

2 

8 

1 

3 

1 

California 

Coloredo 

4 











1 

3 . 


Connecticut 

3 

1 

3 


1 


1 

1 








Delaware (O) 












1 

District of Columb^ 

12 












9 

3 

1 

Florida 

159 

150 

1 

38 

47 

34 

23 

7 

2 

4 

1 

1 


Georgia 









30 

102 

92 

99 

105 

24 



13 

7 

9 

1 

1 

3 

3 . 





Idaho 

31 

35 

82 

80 


1 

9 

9 

5 

3^ 

33 

9 

20 

7 

3 

6 

1 

Illinois 


1 

2 

g 

l4 

10 

13 

6 . 

4 

1 

U 

2 

Indiana 


1 

38 

18 

20 

13 

17 

10 


1 


1 

Iowa 

2 

15 

16 

12 

12 

b 

2 

2 

2 

1 

Kansas 

120 

61 

22 

24 

S3 

S7 

82 

115 

49 

93 

119 

4 

16 

57 

33 

11 

2 




1 




Kentucky 

Louisiana 

2 

2 

31 

2 

16 

4 

1 

4 

1 

15 

7 

37 

51 

68 

56 

42 

78 



2 

5 

2 

4 

4 

4 . 


1 



Maine 



1 

3 

4 

1 

6 

4 

2 

3 

1 

1 

Maryland 


1 

7 

13 

23 

41 

11 

12 

24 

10 

4 

4 

2 

2 

Michigan 



3 

16 

10 

12 

13 

4 

22 

9 

2 . 



3 

Minnesota 



7 

15 

4 

11 

3 , 




Mississippi 



20 

44 

9 . 



4 

2 

Missouri 

1 

9 

8 

18 

21 

10 

24 

4 

3 





Montana 


6 

7 

13 . 




1 

1 

Nebraska 











9 

7 

21 

13 

32 

1 / 12 s 

100 

53 

88 

^ 207 

36 

67 

38 

46 
' 58 

95 

40 

29 

8 

1 

L 

1 




1 . 






Nevada 







3 

4 

2 . 


1 

1 


New Hampshire 

X 






1 

b 

3 

2 

5 

1 

Nev Jersey (aB) 









6 

5 

1 . 

1 

New Jersey (C) 

22 

36 

66 

49 

36 

190 

25 

10 

29 

15 

5b 

86 

1 

1 

1 

9 

15 

XI 

5 

9 

1 

5 

6 

b 

1 

1 


2 . 


New Mrxico 

5 

17 

24 

14 

14 

14 

9 

New York 


2 

27 

15 

4 

11 

p 

22 

b 

2 

1 

3 . 


North Carolina 



on 

in 

4 






North Dakota 

5 

0 

2 

9 

l4 

11 

25 

5 

3 

7 

18 

2 . 

• 

4 

3 

Ohio (a) 

42 

4 

68 

4 

49 

5 

18 

3 

4 

7 

3 

3 

4 

6 

9 

3 

3 

1 

13 

1 

1 

10 

2 

1 

4 

4 

1 

16 

2 

1 

7 

Ohio (ECG) 

Oregon 

Pennsylvania 


17 

6 

2 

4 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

Rhode Island 


1 

39 

22 


b 

g 

21 

8 

1 


1 


South Carolina 


0 

10 

4 

1 

1 

1 , 





South Dakota 


3 

38 

16 

7 

5 . 
7 


1 . 


3 - 


Tennessee 

» » » w • « * 

8 

3 

5 

15 

2 

Texas 

23 

9 

2 

b 

6 

p 

3 

3 

27 

2 

4 

2 

X 


1 . 


1 

1 

Utah 

2 

2 

? * 






Vermont (BC) 

9 


9 

2 

38 

b 


12 

2 

l4 

b 

5 

5 

2 . 


1 

1 

Virginia 

123 

39 

8 

72 

100 

13 

3 

1 i 

1 

3 

1 

7 

4 

Washington 











8 


West Virginia 

33 



c; 

7 

c 

g 

13 

25 

10 

2 

1 

1 


Wisconsin 


3 

j 

T 

P 

2 






Wyoming 

23 

21 


lU 

5 


















6/ Some offices serve areas including more than one county. v. v 7 pr 

7/ Local offices administer one. Uo. three, or four of the specified programs in various combinations. Excludes 720 local 
~ offices (mostly town agencies) in which salaries paid are not reimbursable by the State; these offices serve about one per- 

^ Locll^offlceratoi^ner one!’two, or three of the specified programs in various combinations; aid to dependent children and 

9/ E^cepl old.age assistance, and one administers aid to dependent children end 

** aid to the blind. 


19 

































































































































Table II.--Number of local offices vlth one, tvo, three, or four full-time employees. 


Nxmber of local offices vlth-- 


State 

Total 

number 

of 

local 

offices 

Cne-xcur 

en^o^ees 

One en5>loyee 

Two enqjloyees 

Number 

Percent 

of 

total 

Total 

Direc¬ 

tor 

Visitor 

Clerk 

Sxiper- 

vleor 

Total 

Direc¬ 

tor 

and 

clerk 

Direc¬ 

tor 

and 

visItor 

Visitor 

and 

clerk 

Other 

combi¬ 

nations 

Total. 

1/ 2,961 

1,567 

52.9 

276 

177 

65 

33 

1 

520* 

406 

56 

20 

38 

Alabama.*. 

67 

35 

52.2 

0 





4 

4 




Arizona... 

Ik 

6 

(2) 

0 





0 





Arkansas.. 

75 

60 

80.0 

0 





9 

8 

1 



Cfti1fnrnla. 

1/ 56 

17 

29.3 

2 

2 




7 

4 

3 



Colorado ... 

63 

37 

58.7 

10 

9 


1 


17 

12 

4 

1 


Connecticut.......... 


0 


0 





0 





Delaware (C). 



(2) 

1 



1 


0 





District of Columbia* 

1 

0 


0 





0 





Florida. 

12 

0 


0 





0 





Georgia... 

159 

1U2 

89.3 

38 

36 


2 


47 

42 

5 



Idaho.... 

30 

23 

(2) 

0 




13 

10 

2 

1 


Illinois. 

102 

26 

25.5 

1 

1 




7 

4 

2 

1 


Indiana.... 

92 

25 

27.2 

1 

1 




2 

2 




Iowa... 

99 

72 

72.7 

1 

1 




38 

37 

1 



Kansas... 

105 

66 

62.9 

15 

13 


0 


18 

16 

2 



Kentucky.. 

120 

103 

85.8 

57 

56 


. 1 

33 




33 

Louisiana... 

61 

2 

3*3 

0 




0 




Maine... 

22 

11 

(2) 

0 





2 



2 


Maryland... 

2*4- 

6 

(2) 

0 





1 

1 




Michigan... 

83 

25 

30.1 

1 



1 


7 

5 

1 

1 


Minnesota. 

87 

38 

43,7 

0 





3 

2 



1 

Mississippi.. 

32 

6k 

78.0 

0 





16 

16 



/ 

Missouri. 

115 

36 

31.3 

0 





10 

8 

1 

1 


Montena.... 

k9 

41 

(2) 

9 

9 




18 

18 




Nebraska. -.. 

93 

59 

63.4 

8 

6 


2 


21 

15 

6 



.. 

9 

7 

(2) 

6 


6 



1 

1 



New Hampshire.. 

7 

0 


0 





0 





New Jersey (a). 

21 

0 

_ 

0 





0 





New Jersey (C)....... 

13 

0 

_ 

0 





0 





New Mexico.. 

32 

16 

(2) 

1 

1 




9 

9 




New York............. 

3/ 128 

30 

23.4 

1 

1 




15 

9 

5 


1 

North Carolina... 

100 

55 

55.0 

2 



2 


11 

11 




Nort.b Dakota......... 

53 

42 

79.2 

8 

4 


4 


20 

18 

1 


1 

Ohio . 

88 

25 

28,4 

0 





2 

1 

1 



Ohio (BCG). 

207 

142 

68.6 

68 

6'3 

1 

4 


49 

40 

9 



Oregon. ... 

36 

15 

(2) 

4 

1 


3 


5 

3 



2 

Pennsylvania. 

67 

7 

10.4 

0 w 





0 





Rhode Island.. 

38 

29 

(2) 

17 

17 




6 

4 

2 



South Carolina....... 

h6 

7 

(2) 

0 




1 


1 



South Dakota.••.*.••• 

58 

55 

94.8- 

2 

2 




39 

36 

3 



Tennessee............ 

95 

79 

83.2 

3 


1 

2 


22 

15 

1 

6 


Texas.. 

ho 

0 


0 





0 




Utah. 

29 

19 

(2) 

6 

b 




6 

6 




Vermont (BC).. 

9 

7 

(2) 

0 





2 



2 


Vlrfirlr _... 

123 

85 

69.1 

9 

1 


8 


38 

36 

2 



W.aflhington. 

39 

11 

(2) 

2 


1 

1 


6 

1 


5 


West Virginia.•••«.*. 

8 

0 


0 





0 





W1 scons In.. 

72 

20 

27.8 

0 





5 

3 

2 



Wyoming. ... 

23 

19 

(a) 

3 

3 




10 

10 















^ Includes 5 large local offices In California for \rtiich data were not reported. See table I, footnote U. 
2/ Not computed; base less than 50* 


20 












































































































































































































ty State and type of position, for a pay-ix)ll period ended December 31, 19^4-5-April 30, 191*6 


Number of local offices vlth— 

State 

Three employees 

Four employees 

Total 

Director, 

visitor, 

and 

clerk 

Director 
and tvo 
clerks 

Two 

visitors 
and one 
clerk 

Other 

combi¬ 

nations 

Total 

Director, 

tvo 

visitors, 
and one 
clerk 

Director, 
visitor, 
and tvo 
clerks 

Other 

combi¬ 

nations 

U89 

403 

39 

14 

33 

282 

145 

103 

34 

Total 

18 

18 




13 

4 

9 



3 

3 




3 

2 

1 



1*0 

40 




11 

9 

2 


Arknnffap 

5 

5 




3 

2 


1 

Cftl Ifoml a 

1 * 

3 

1 



6 

3 

1 

2 

Colorado 

0 





0 



Connecticut 

1 



1 


1 



1 

Delaware (C) 

0 





0 




District of Columbia 

0 





0 




Florida 

34 

33 

1 



23 

16 

7 


Georgia 

9 

9 




1 

1 



Idaho 

9 

8 


1 


0 

5 

4 


minolfl 

8 

8 




14 

11 

3 


Indiana 

20 

17 

3 



13 

4 

9 


Iowa 

16 

9 

7 


• •••eeeee 

17 

1 

11 

5 

Kansas 

11 




11 

2 



2 

Kentucky 

0 





2 


1 

1 

Louisiana 

*5 



5 


4 

1 


3 

Maine 

2 

2 




3 

2 


1 

Maryland 

1 ^ 

13 




4 

4 



Michigan 

2 ^ 

n 

10 


2 

12 

1 

11 


Minnesota 

j 

41 

39 

1 

1 

7 

4 

3 


Mississippi 

11 

yy 

10 



1 

15 

7 

7 

1 

Missouri 

10 

6 

k 



4 

1 

3 


Montana 

24 

23 

1 



6 

3 

2 

1 

Nebraska 

0 




0 




Nevada 

0 





0 




New Hampshire 

0 





0 




New Jersey (a) 

0 





0 




New Jersey (C) 


K 

1 



1 


1 


New Mexico 

7 

Q 

6 



3 

5 

1 

2 

2 

New York 

27 

21 

.4 


2 

15 

4 

8 

3 

North Carolina 

1 o 

K 

3 


3 

4 


4 


North Dakota 

Q 

A 

j 


1 

14 

14 



Ohio (A) 

y 

18 

l6 



2 

7 

6 

1 


Ohio (BCG) 


2 



1 

3 

1 

1 

1 

Oregon 

0 

k 

9 



1 

3 

2 

1 


Pennsylvania 

P 

3 

1 



1 

4 

1 


3 

Rhode Island 

a 





6 

6 



South Carolina 

10 

10 




4 

3 

1 


South Dakota 




3 


l6 

14 


2 

Tennessee 

jO 

o 





0 




Texas 

O 

o 




4 

3 


1 

Utah 

j 

o 

3 


3 


2 



2 

Vermont (BC) 

0 


o 


1 

11 

3 

8 


Virginia 

27 




1 

1 



1 

Washington 

c, 

(\ 


w w W * 



0 




West Virginia 

\J 

7 




2 

8 

6 

1 

1 

Wisconsin 

1 

y 

o 



1 


1 


Wyoming 

5 

3 










^ Excludes 720 local offices. See table I, footnote 7. 


21 






















































































































Table 111 ,—Number of full-time emploTees In local offices, by State and type of position, 
for a pay-roll period ended December 31 > 19 ^ 5 “Aprll 30 , 19^6 


State 

Total 

Directors 

Supervisors 

Vlaltors 

Clerks 

Others 

Total. 

32,122 

1/ 2,657 

1.675 

2/ 14,819 

11.635 

1.336 

Alabama. 

396 

67 

7 

177 

143 

2 

Arizona. 

175 

14 

7 

90 

59 

5 

Arkaivsae. 

287 

75 

1 

112 

99 

0 

California J/. 

2,088 

52 

134 

897 

855 

150 

Colorado. 

499 

58 

22 

201 

194 

24 

Connecticut.. 

133 

4 

9 

SO 

38 

2 

Delaware (C). 

8 

0 

1 

4 

3 

0 

District of Columbia.... 

Il6 

1 

9 

49 

44 

13 

Florida. 

511 

11 

37 

291 

171 

1 

Ctoorgia. 

571 

156 

13 

183 

205 

l 4 

Idaho. 

116 

29 

0 

46 

4 i 

0 

Illinois. 

1,605 

98 

103 

818 

561 

25 

Indiana. 

971 

92 

44 

536 

296 

3 

Iowa. 

455 

99 

7 

167 

181 

1 

Kansas. 

609 

101 

16 

209 

248 

35 

Kentucky. 

181 

0 

7 

174 

0 

0 

Louisiana. 

392 

60 

52 

421 

333 

26 

Maine. 

187 

9 

10 

98 

70 

0 

Maryland. 

452 

21 

36 

238 

139 

18 

Michigan. 

961 

81 

61 

575 

24 l 

3 

Minnesota. 

1,010 

85 

54 

398 

431 

42 

Mississippi. 

308 

81 

0 

119 

108 

0 

Missouri. 

1,261 ^ 

111 

68 

622 

436 

24 

Montana. 

152 

48 

0 

39 

65 

0 

Nebraska. 

384 

79 

9 

155 

l 4 l 

0 

Nevada. 

14 

2 

0 

11 


0 

New Hampshire. 

96 

6 

3 

57 

30 

0 

New Jersey (A 5 ). 

400 

15 

30 

174 

174 

7 

New Jersey (C). 

234 

13 

14 

125 

78 

0 

New Mexico. 

196 

30 

4 

90 

72 

0 

New York. 

7,039 

128 

469 

3,056 

2 ,Sl 4 

572 

North Carolina. 

609 

97 

12 

236 

238 

26 

North Dakota. 

134 

43 

0 

24 

60 

7 

Ohio (a). 

894 

87 

22 

532 

245 

8 

Ohio (BCO). 

677 

4 / 158 

34 

209 

249 

27 

Oregon. 

361 

25 

11 

169 

145 

11 

Pennsylvania. 

2,384 

66 

199 

1.113 

818 

188 

Rhode Island. 

279 

38 

16 

110 

95 

20 

South Carolina. 

345 


7 

187 

105 

0 

South Dakota. 

i 48 

58 

0 

30 

60 

0 

Tennessee. 

442 

83 

7 

212 - 

137 

3 

Texas. 

926 

73 

0 

552 

288 

13 

Utah. 

219 

26 

17 

105 

65 

6 

Vermont. 

31 

0 

0 

21 

10 

0 

Virginia. 

541 

111 

14 

207 

206 

T 

hashington. 

991 

25 

94 

476 

362 

34 

West Virginia. 

260 

8 

8 

176 

51 

17 

Wisconsin. 

507 

64 

7 

229 

201 

6 

Wyoming. 

67 

23 

0 

15 

29 

0 


Xj Includes l 66 directors —128 In New York and 3 S In Rhode Island—for ^om complete data on salaries were not available. 
2 / Excludes 11 visitors in Delaware (a) for which agency no other data were reported. 

V Excludes es^loyees In 3 countlos. See table I, footnote 4 . 

4 / Includes 21 workers such as visitors, specialists, and technicians tes^orarily in charge of office. 


- 22 - 































































T&bl« IT.—NuBb«r of local officos with part<-tiBe eo^loyeet and number of part-time ea^loyeee and equlTalent fall time of each ee^loyees, bj State and 

type of poBitlon, for a pay-roll period ended December 3 I 9 19^^^-^rll 30* 19^ 


State 


Number 

of local 

offices with— 





u 

1 

of part-time e^loyees 





Total 

number 

of 

local 

offloei 

No 

par t- 
tlme 
employ¬ 
ees 

Some 
par t- 

tiae 

employ¬ 

ees 

Part- 

time 

employ¬ 

ees 

only 

No 

employ¬ 
ees re¬ 
ported 

V 

Total 

Directors 

S^^errisors 

Tisitors 

Clerks 

All others 

Par t- 
time 

SqniT- 

aleat 

full¬ 

time 

Part- 

tims 

SqqiT- 

alsnt 

fhll- 

tlme 

Part- 

time 

EqulT¬ 

alent 

full¬ 

time 

Part- 

time 

EqulT- 

alsnt 

fuU- 

tlme 

Part- 

time 

XquiT- 

alent 

full¬ 

time 

Part- 

time 

EquiT- 

alent 

full¬ 

time 

Total... 

2,956 

2,275 

588 

73 

20 

2/ 863 

390.9 

99 

44.3 

17 

8.7 

231 

115.8 

303 

150.0 

if a 3 

72.1 

A1 A 

67 

67 

0 

0 

0 

0 


0 


0 


0 


0 


0 


&t >4 • 

01 

l 4 

7 R 

R 

q 

0 

0 

12 

6.0 

0 


0 


1 

.3 

4 

2.0 

7 

3.5 

kr)r 

TX 

2 

0 

0 

2 

1.0 

0 


0 


1 


1 


0 


Calif. If. 

53 


29 

1 

0 

62 

30.7 

1 

.8 

2 

1.2 

28 

15.3 

25 

11.5 

6 

1.9 


63 

54 

7 

2 

0 

11 

5.5 

2 

1.0 

0 

__ 

3 

1.5 

0 

3.0 

0 

_ , 


i 

4 

0 

0 

0 

0 


0 


0 


0 


0 


0 


Del. (C).. 

y 

0 

3 

0 

0 

8 

4.0 

0 

.... 

2 

1.0 

2 

1.0 

4 

2.0 

0 


D.C• 

1 

1 

0 

0 

0 

0 


0 


0 

— 

0 

— 

0 

—- 

0 

— 

Tla« • a. •.» 

12 

1 

11 

0 

0 

38 

10.0 

0 


0 


3 

1.7 

6 

2.8 

29 

5.5 

Oa. 

159 

127 

31 

0 

1 

37 

20.5 

1 

K 

0 

___ 

9 

5.2 

27 

14,8 

0 

- 

Idaho. 

30 

30 

0 

0 

0 

0 

am 

0 


0 


0 


0 


0 


ni 

102 

92 

99 

3 

0 

0 

3 

1.5 

0 

— _ . 

0 

_ 

1 

•5 

2 

1.0 

0 

_—, 


53 

39 

0 

0 

4 / 13 

5.5 

0 

_ 

1 

,5 

6 

2.5 

6 

2.5 

53 

( 5 ) 


99 


6 

0 

0 


3.0 

0 


0 


4 

2.6 

2 

1.0 

0 


yy 


q 

0 

2 

13 

6.3 

27.0 

0 


0 


3 

1.5 

10 

4.8 

0 

••• 


120 

44 

60 

12 

0 

4 

72 

0 


0 

_ 

72 

27.0 

0 


0 


ay.. 

T.A , 

61 

20 

4 l 

0 

4 l 

( 5 ) 

0 


0 


0 

0 

__ 

4 i 

( 5 ) 

Maine..... 

22 

13 

9 

0 

0 

9 

2.0 

0 

... 

0 

... 

0 

— 

0 


9 

2.0 

Md. 

24 

11 

13 

0 

0 

40 

27.2 

1 

.5 

1 

.7 

21 

16.7 

4 

3.2 

13 

6.1 

Hioh. 

83 

83 

0 

0 

0 

0 

— 

0 

—- 

0 


0 


0 

.— 

0 

— 

Mian... 

87 

81 

6 

0 

0 

7 

3.5 

0 

..... 

1 

.5 

0 

... 

4 

2.0 

2 

1.0 

W1 ,, , . 

82 

80 

2 

0 

0 

2 

1.0 

0 

_ 

0 

... 

0 


2 

1.0 

0 

—M 

Mo. 

115 

100 

15 

0 

0 

zy 

12.5 

0 


0 


6 

3.0 

15 

7.5 

4 

2 .C 

Mont 

49 

43 

5 

1 

0 

6 

3.0 

1 

.5 

0 

— 

1 

.5 

4 

2.0 

0 

— 

Nebr. 

93 

63 

18 

12 

0 

39 

19.5 

14 

7.0 

0 

— 

9 

4.5 

15 

7.5 

1 

.5 

YJav 

q 

7 

4 

1 

1 

0 

2 

1.0 

0 

• —^ 

0 

... 

1 

.5 

1 

.5 

0 


K.H.•••... 

7 

3 

0 

0 

3 

1.5 

0 

... 

0 

— 

0 


3 

1.5 

0 

— 

K.J. (A).. 

21 

6 

15 

0 

0 

23 

11.0 

6 

3.0 

0 

— 

1 

.3 

4 

1.8 

12 

5.9 

S.J. ( 0 ).. 

13 

13 

0 

0 

0 

0 

— 

0 


0 


0 


0 

—- 

0 

— 

S.Mex. 

32 

8 

23 

0 

1 

25 

8.0 

0 

—. 

0 

— 

0 

— 

0 

—— 

25 

8.0 

S.T. 6/... 

128 

97 

31 

0 

0 

47 

17.5 

0 

— 

5 

1.2 

12 

5.8 

20 

8.9 

12 

. 1.6 

s.c . 

100 

97 

3 

0 

0 

3 

1.5 

0 

— 

0 

— 

1 

.5 

2 

1.0 

0 

— 

M.Dalc. 

53 

4 i 

7 

4 

1 

15 

7.5 

9 

‘^.5 

0 

— 

0 


6 

3.0 

0 


Ohio U).. 

88 

88 

0 

0 

0 

0 

— 

0 

-- 

0 

—- 

0 

—- 

0 

... 

0 


Ohio (BOO) 

207 

138 

27 

32 

10 

77 

31.6 

39 

14.0 

2 

1.2 

13 

6.0 

18 

8.3 

5 

1.5 

Oree. 

36 

15 

17 

3 

1 

33 

13.0 

4 

2.0 

1 

.7 

5 

2.8 

12 


11 

2.2 

Pa. 

67 

32 

35 

0 

0 

39 

15.3 

1 

.5 

0 

— 

3 

1.9 

1 


34 

12.5 

H.I. 

38 

32 

6 

0 

0 

6 

3.0 

0 

— 

0 

— 

3 

1.5 

3 

1.5 

0 

--- 

S.C. 

46 

46 

0 

0 

0 

0 

-— 

0 

— 

0 

... 

0 

— 

0 

— 

0 


S.Dak. 

58 

53 

5 

0 

0 

5 

2.5 

0 


0 


1 

.5 

4 

2.0 

0 


lenn. 

95 

94 

1 

0 

0 

1 

.5 

0 

... 

0 

.— 

1 

.5 

0 

— 

0 

— 

Tex.. 

4o 

18 

22 

0 

0 

59 

29.5 

0 

— 

0 

—. 

0 

— 

59 

29.5 

0 

““ 

Utah. 

29 

17 

10 

2 

0 

14 

7.0 

2 

1.0 

0 

— 

0 


1 

.5 

11 

5.5 

Tt. (BC).. 

9 

7 

2 

0 

0 

2 

1.1 

0 

— 

0 

— 

0 

—. 

2 

1.1 

0 

— 

Ta. 

123 

100 

20 

3 

0 

26 

13.3 

6 

3.0 

0 

•— 

3 

1.5 

11 

5.8 

6 

3.0 


39 

9 

30 

0 

0 

64 

29.3 

12 

6.0 

4 

1.7 

l 4 

8.4 

10 

5.3 

24 

7.9 

W.Ta. 

8 

8 

0 

0 

0 

0 

—• 

0 

— 

0 


0 

.— 

0 


0 

— 

Wls. 

72 

60 

12 

0 

0 

14 

7.1 

0 

— 

0 

— 

3 

1.7 

9 

3.9 

2 

1.5 

. 

23 

23 

0 

0 

0 

0 


0 


0 


0 


0 


0 



^ fcclutoe 94 part-time eB 5 )loyeee—53 in Indiana and 4l in Loulalazka—for whom Information with reject to fUll-tlma equiralenta 
3/ Ixcludee 5 offices. See table I, footnote 4. 

y Xxcludea 53 part-time emoloyees for whom Information with respect to full-time aqulralents was not aTallable. 

% 


was not available 


Data not aTallable. 
^ Excludes 720 offices* 


See table I. footnote 7* 


23 




































































DEFINITIONS 


For pur]X)ses of the report on salaries, the four major classes 
of employees were defined as follows: 

Directors : Snployees who are the responsible head of tlie 
local office and who are commonly referred to as county 
director, administrator, superintendent, secretary, or 
director-v;orker. 

Supervisors : Workers whose major function is supervision 
of ( 1 ) visitors or ( 2 ) supervisors of visitors. Does not 
Include director-workers, consultants, or senior case 
workers vrtio have some supervisory functions but whose 
major function is to carry assigned case loads or perform 
other duties. 

Visitors: Snployees in a social-work position involving 
the direct determination of original end continuing eligi¬ 
bility to receive assistance or the direct provision of 
service. Includes the social-work employees who are 
directly responsible for assigned case loads and who en¬ 
gage directly in social investigation and case-work services, 
fiho are responsible for intake and application investiga¬ 
tions, or who perform special investigations to determine 
age, employment, bank and insurance assets, and other 
facts pertinent to eligibility. Includes employees commonly 
referred to as visitors, case workers, investigators, and 
child welfare workers who carry assigned case loads; super¬ 
visors and consultants other than director-workers, idien 
the major part of their work consists of directly carrying 
assigned case loads; and intake workers, application 
interviewers, and resource workers, provided they are 
regarded as being in social-work positions. 

Clerks : Bnployees in secretarial, stenographic, typing 
filing, bookkeeping, and clerical positions, including 
auditing, accoianting, and statistical clerks. 


- 24 - 


U, S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE : O—1948 










REQUIREMENTS AND INCOMES OF RECIPIENTS 
OF OLD-AGE ASSISTANCE IN 21 STATES IN 1944 

6 


PUBLIC ASSISTANCE REPORT NO. 13 


FEDERAL SECURITY AGENCY 

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION 


Bureau of Public Assistance 







^r< vv;r 




m 




i' '.-i- ■'^ 

15 • >Vr. • 

JiK-f 

'I' 

• • ;\ ,‘tr 






\ ■ V.I v' >'"i ) . . ■•' 


'•'V' 

. -'■•• T ■/.•‘'■'■•r. r'f 

' ’f* - ■':' .V . ’^v ..'■ • ., ..i.;* • 

X":- ■‘ r’.''rt^': 

» '.' -A- '■’>*' l\'''. *’'.'•v''*' 

{*»>*»' 1/^'/.' 5 ■ , f*' i, ^' 

*-.• '.'• ; : -f; - -.•- ;■ ■,, ».-• 

;v/A- '■■■•■ ■ 

.• ' 

A •••'-■ ■/ 

' • r ► ^»' • ■ •. • ^ • * 

v';..' 

i. -'ir ' v';> ■■‘'\ / /« .■' "i. 

^ V A:.i;A ■: 

.V . 















REQUIREMENTS 


AND INCOMES OF 


RECIPIENTS 

0 F 

OLD 

-AGE 

ASSISTANCE 

IN 2 1 

S T A 

T E S 

I N 

19 4 4 


ty 

Ruth White 
and 

Thomas G. Hutton 


Statistics and Analysis Division 
Bureau of Public Assistance 


Public Assistance Report No, 13 


FEDERAL SECURITY AGENCY 
Social Security Administration 
Washington, D.C. 

March 194 ® 






t 



* 


I 



t 


f • 







1 


r* , 


I 


c' 

I 


} 


'V-:- 


"f- 


‘V* 


>: 


I 


<• 




r£.., 




I 



< / 



•/ ^ 


•/ 


.. 

tt, 




► 


; f ■ 


.N 



A t 


i 



CONTENTS 


k 


I. Introduction.1 


II. Classification of Cases . 4 

III. Requirements...5 


Average cost of requirements.5 

Requirements of cases with the cost of all requirements 

known.6 

Variation in individual requirements .. 8 

Relation of budgeting policies to variations in require¬ 
ments . 10 


IV. Income. 12 

Cash income otlier than assistance. 12 

Cash income of recipient-only cases. 13 

Source of cash income of recipient-only cases. 13 

Earnings. 13 

Cash contributions from relatives .... 18 

Other cash income.. . 19 

Cash income of cases that included recipient and 

spouse.19 

Total cash income including assistance. 21 

Sources of total cash income. 26 

Income in kind.•... 29 

Effect of place of residence and of living arrange¬ 
ments on receipt of income in kind. 29 

Shelter provided by relatives. 29 

Other shelter provisions . 31 

Cases to which relatives contributed income in 

kind. 33 

Value of income in kind. 33 

Total income including the value of income in kind ... 36 


V 


Appendix: Samples on Which the Data Are Based 


42 
























ft.' ^ 



I 





1 


I 




J 


I 




t 


I. INTROEUCTICN 


Under title I of the Social Security Act, grants-in-aid are niade 
to States to enable them to furnish old-age assistance, as far as prac¬ 
ticable under the conditions in the State, to aged needy individuals. 
Each State established its own standards, policies, and procedures lor 
determining v;ho is needy and the amomt of assistance needed. The 
Federal act requires, however, that in determining need the State 
shall take into consideration any income and resources of an individual 
claiming assistance. As would be expected in view of the fact that 
responsibility rests with the States for establishing assistance 
standards and that the States differ greatly both in their attitudes 
toward meeting need and their ability to finance a share of the cost, 
great variation exists among the States in the amounts and relative 
adequacy of assistance payments. 

Although some States have from time to time made detailed 
studies of the requirements and resources, including assistance, of 
their recipients of old-age assistance, uniform inlormation of this 
type has not in the past been available for a substantial number of 
States. Consequently, the Bureau of Public Assistance has been forced 
to rely heavily on data on the amounts of individual payanents and on 
average payments as reflecting State differences in what public assist¬ 
ance agencies determine that old people require and what they have to 
live on. 

To supply a more nearly adequate basis for evaluating State 
differences in assistance payments, the Bureau of Public Assistance, 
with the voluntary cooperation of 21 State public assist&nce agencies, 
undertooK in 1944 to obtain information on the amounts that recipients 
required to meet their needs, the amounts and sources oi their iiicomes, 
and the aiaoimts of their assistance.!^/ In December 194:? a preliminary 
report was issued summarizing the results of the State studies, 
which were conducted on a sample basis in some month within the 
period April-November 1944. This report presents an analysis of in¬ 
formation contained in the preliminary report. 


U The participating States were: 


Massachusetts 
Michigan 
Minnesota 
Mississippi 
Missouri 

Montana also supplied some information compiled in an independent 
State-wide study before the plan for the Bureau’s study was completed. 


California 
District of Columbia 
Illinois 
Kansas 
Maine 


New Hampshire 
New Mexico 
North Carolina 
North Dakota 
Oklahoma 


Piiode Island 
Tennessee 
Vermont 
Virginia 
West Virginia 


2J Public Assistance Report No.'9, Preliminary Tables on Incomes and 
Living Arrangements of Recipients of Old-Age Assistance in 21 States » 

1944. 

y The sample data have been inflated to give each State its proper weight 
in the data for all States combined. For a statement on the size of 
the State samples and on the sampling method, see the appendix, p. 42. 






Since the time of the study, assistance levels have risen 
sharply, reflecting primarily the effects of changes in the federal 
law find mounting living costs. In 194^, Congress amended title I of 
the Social Security Act to provide a larger Federal contribution. 

The maximum on the individual monthly payment in which the Federal 
Government will participate was increased from t40 to $4b, and the 
federal share of expenditures for assistance also was raised. Al- 
though payments are generally higher than in 1944> the variation 
in State average payments has not been significantly narrov»ed. To 
reduce the degree of variation, the Social Security’ Adiiiinistration 
has recommended to Congress further amendiaent of the Social Security * 
Act to authorize special Federal aid to low-income States, taking 
into account the State's fiscal ability. 4 / 

■ -T 

With the availa.bility of additional Federal funds, the Bureau 
of Public Assistance and State public assistance agencies placed re¬ 
newed emphasis on the achievement of the requirement, implicit in 
the Social Security Act, of equitable treatment of needy individuals'^- 
in similar circumstances within a State. Assistance standards that 
are definite and capable of reasonably uniform application through¬ 
out the State are essential to reaching this goal.^ Since the 
amendments became effective,'most States have made progressive 
changes in their State plans and procedures relating to the deteraiina- 
tion of requirements and consideration oi resources. Through its 
continuing reviev/ of State administration, the Bureau has had oppor¬ 
tunity to ascertain that these changes are generally resulting in 
greater uniformity within States in the amounts of assistance re¬ 
ceived by persons in similar circumstances, ffill attainment of this 
objective, however, will necessitate not only a larger Federal con¬ 
tribution to low-income States but also basic changes in methods of 
financing public assistance in some States in which the localities 
contribute funds 


ij See Annual Report of the Feder.-fL Security Agency. Section Six . 

Social Security Board. 1946 . pp. 496-500, and The Principle of 
Equalization Applied to the Allocation of Grcints-in-Aid . Bureau 
of Research and Statistics Memorandum No. 66, Social Security 
Administration. 

^ See "State Responsibility for Definiteness in Assistance Standards,'' 
Social Security Bulletin . March 1947, pp. 29-34. 

^ The Principle of Equalization Applied to the Allocation of Grants- 

in-Aid . Social Security Administration, Bureau of Research and 
Statistics Memorandum No. 66, pp. 181-206. 


- 2 - 











Since 1944 , it is probable that changes have occurred in the 
amounts of income of recipients from sources other than assistance, 
as well as in the amounts oi their assistance, fewer part-time jobs 
are open to aged persons of limited employability th?^n in 1944, which 
was a war year. Higher living costs may have lessened the ability 
of many relatives to contribute to the support ol needy old persons. 
On the other hand, in some States more restrictive policies may have 
resulted in greater efforts to obtain contributions from relatives. 
Thus the assistance payment may represent a larger or smaller com¬ 
ponent of total income than in 1944• 

Despite the important changes that have occurred since 1944 , 
the data here presented should prove useful in illustrating the 
differences from State to State and within States in what recipients 
then had to live on and the sources of tlieir incomes. The report 
shows also the substantial inequities resulting in 1944 in certain 
States from lack of uniformity in stajidards, policies, cjcid procedures 
for determining amounts of assistance. The report, moreover, serves 
as a bench mark for measuring progress in achieving the objective 
of equitable treatment of persons in similar circumstences. 


- 3 - 





II. CLASSIFICATION OF CASES 




In determining the amounts of assistance payments, public 
assistance agencies commonly follow the practice of preparing a 
budget for each recipient or case. A budget is prepared in accord¬ 
ance vdth agency policies for the determination of requirements and 
their cost and for the consideration of the resources that can be 
applied to meeting the requirements. In some States, at the tijiie 
of the study, it was the policy to include in a budget the require¬ 
ments of only one individual, and to consider resources available 
to meet his neads. Policies in other States permitted the inclusion 
of requirements and resources of additional members of the family. 



To assure maximm comparability in the data, a uniform 
definition of a case was established, and cases were classified 
according to their composition. A case was defined as consisting 
of all persons in the assistance group; that is, all individuals 
whose personal requirements were included in the budget in determin¬ 
ing the assistance payment or payments. Cases consisting of the 
recipient only—or "the recipient and spouse only—and of the re¬ 
cipient and others, with or without spouse, were separately classified. 


In recipient-only cases, the requirements and resources of 
one recipient were included in the budget and the assistance payment 
was intended to meet the needs of this recipient only. For cases 
of recipient and spouse only, the requirements and resources of both 
husband and vdfe were included in the budget. The spouse may have 
been eligible for assistance or may have been included as essential 
to the well-being of the recipient. Similarly, the cases that in¬ 
cluded the recipient and others, with or without the spouse, might 
have included one or more persons—other than the recipient—eligible 
for old-age assistance. 

V/hether separate payments were made to individuals in cases 
that included tuo or more persons depended on the eligibility of each 
individual in the case, and on agency practice. If only one in¬ 
dividual was eligible, one payment was made to the case. When there 
were two or more eligible individuals, the number of assistance pay¬ 
ments depended on the practice of the State. Some States usually 
made a separate payment to each eligible individual, while several 
others met the needs of two or more eligible individuals through one 
assistance payment. 


Most of the analysis in this report relates to recipient-only 
cases and to those that included the recipient and spouse only. Thus 
the influence of differences both in budgeting practices and in com¬ 
position of the case load is minimized in State comparisons. 


- 4 - 




III. REQUIREME3JTS 


Since each State agency establishes its o'An standards lor 
requirements, they vary widely from State to State, State agencies 
commonly designate specific basic items that people require for 
living, such as food, shelter, clothing, and household operating- 
expense. Often the standards s^jecify the circumstances under which 
additional items are to be included. Some reci^^ients, for example, 
need uioney -with which to obtain medical care. Other recipients 
may not require medical care or may be able to obtain it by means 
other than through the money payment. 

Differences exist not only in the content of the standards 
for a given item but also in the range of items recognized. Some 
ox the variations reflect differences in the economic resources of 
the States end their ability to appropriate funds for assistance. 
Public assistance agencies with comparatively adequate funds have 
tended to include larger amounts for the basic requirements and to 
recognize a greater variety of specified circumstances necessitating 
additional amounts of money for certain groups of individuals than 
agencies with less adequate appropriations. 

In some States, at the time of tlie study, all items recognized 
as reouirements v/ere mandatory in part or in whole with the local 
agency; in a few States all items were optional vlth the local agency. 
State agencies varied also in their cost figures for a given item. 
These may have been for a fixed amount, varied only for differences 
in local costs, or they may have represented either a range of 
amounts or a maximum or minimum amount that might be included by 
the local agency. Sometimes cost figures were intended only as 
guides to workers. States differed, moreover, in the frequency 
with which cost figures were revised to take account of price changes. 

Although the current policy of the Bureau of Public Assistance 
calls for the establishment of State-wide standards governing the 
requirements common to all recipients and tne requirements common 
to recipients in certain specifisd circumstances, in 1944 some of 
the States participating in the study did nor have standards for 
all requirements tiiat were State-wide or definite. 

AVERAGE COST OF REQUIREMENTS 

Other State differences in budgeting practices affect the 
comparability of information on the cost of requirements. Some States 
do not include the cost of requirements that are available to the re¬ 
cipient—for example, free shelter. Other States include the cost of 
requirements and offset as resources the value of the items available 


786346 0 - 48 -2 


- 5 - 


in kind. Three of the 21 States—California, New Mexico, and North 
Dakota—included the cost of all requirements for all cases. Massa¬ 
chusetts, Iittissouri, North Carolina, and Vifest Virginia placed a money- 
value on income in kind in nearly all cases vdth such income. In 
the other States, however, a substantial proportion of the cases had 
income in kind on which no exact value was placed, with the result 
that the item available in kind was not included in the requirements.?/ 
To obtain comparability in the State data on the cost of requirements, 
cases for which the money value of items available in kind was not 
included in the requirements were excluded from this analysis. Tlie 
amounts shown, therefore, represent the total cost of all require¬ 
ments, as determined by the agency under standards in effect at the 
time -the study was made for cases in which the total cost was known. 

The number of persons in the assistance group also influenced 
the variation in amounts reported as requirements. California, the 
District of Columbia, Illinois, Michigan, and Minnesota took into 
account only the requirements of -the recipient, while the other 16 
States included the requirements of more than one person in -the 
budgets for some cases. As stated previously, cases in these 16 
States have been classified as recipient-only cases, cases that in¬ 
cluded the recipient and spouse, and those that included other per¬ 
sons, with or T/ithout the spouse. The analysis has been confined 
largely to data for the first two types of cases. 

REQUIREMENTS OF CASES WITH THE COST OF ALL REQUIRE^IENTS KNOWN 

The amounts of requirements of cases consisting of the re¬ 
cipient only, with the total cost of requirements known, represent 
the amounts, in cash or in kind, that the agencies determined these 
recipients needed to live on. The average monthly cost of require¬ 
ments for such cases for -the 21 States combined (excluding flat-grant- 
minus-income cases in California) was ^^ 35 . 64 . The average was lowest 
in Tennessee ($18.31) and highest for budget cases in California 
($ 61 . 11 ), and ranged between $30 and $40 in I 4 of the 21 States 
(table 1 ). 

Similar variation occurred among States in cases consisting 
of the recipient and spouse, Yd.th the cost of all requirements known. 

In the 16 States that computed these requirements jointly the average 
amount ranged from $30.38 in Tennessee to $73.4? in Massachusetts. 

In each of these States except Kansas the average was more than 30 
percent greater than the average amount for recipient-only cases, and 


7 / Cases for which the value of relatively small amounts of income in 
kind (less than $3) was not known are classified as having the total 
cost of requirements known. 


- 6 - 




Table 1 .—Average requirements for cases with all requirements 
known, by type of assistance case, in a month in 1944 


State 

Average per 

case for— 

Recipient- 
only 
cases ^ 

Recipient- 
and-spouse 
cases 2/ 

Total. 

i/ $ 35.64 

$ 49.25 

California, budget cases 4 /.. 

61.11 

V - 

District of Columbia. 

37.75 

— 

Illinois. 

34.26 

— 

Kaneat. 

30.14 

44.21 

Maine. 

34.14 

55.16 

Massachusetts. 

46.36 

75.47 

Michigan. 

34.61 . 

— 

Minnesota. 

33.22 

— 

Mississippi. 

24.37 

39.55 

Missouri. 

30.O8 ■ 

53.71 

Montana. 

37.24 

60.12 

New Hampshire. 

31.72 

53.96 

New Mexico. 

31.17 

51.22 

North Carolina. 

28.27 

44.93 

North Dakota. 

38.63 

63.16 

Oklahoma.. 

31.57 

51.25 • 

Rhode Island. 

39.02 

65.53 

Tennessee. 

18.51 

30.58 

Vermont. 

33.78 

51.82 

Virginia. 

24.61 

4 h.i 7 

West Virginia. 

22.07 

36.75 


1/ 21 States. 

2/ 16 States; excludes 5 States that made separate budgets for each 
” eligible individual. 

2/ Excludes flat-grant cases in California, for which payments were 
determined by deducting income, if any, from $50* 

4 / Represents budget cases for which payments were determined, with- 
” in the $50 maximum, by deducting income from the amount of total 
need computed according to a standard budgetary guidp, 
































in Missouri and Virginia it was almost 80 percent greater. The per¬ 
centage by which the average amount of requirements of recipient-and- 
spouse cases was greater than the average amount for recipient-only 
cases was as follows; 

Percent State 


Less than 50.0.Kansas. 

50.0 - 54.9 .Vermont. 

55.0 - 59.9 .North Carolina. 

60.0 - 64.9 .Massachusetts, Maine, 

Mississippi, Montana, 

New Mexico, North Dakota, 
Oklahoma. 

65.0 - 69.9 .Rhode Island, Tennessee, 

7/est Virginia. 

70.0 - 74.9 .New Hampshire. 

75.0 - 79.9.Mssouri, Virginia 


VARIATION IN INDIVIDUAL REQUIREMEl^TS . , 

In recipient-only cases with the cost of all requirements 
known, the amount of requirements ranged from less than ^10 in 4 
States to $100 or more in 13 States. The larger ligures resulted, 
for the most part, from the inclusion in some States of substantial 
amounts to cover requirements for medical care in a few cases. The 
distribution of cases by cimount of requirements varied greatly from 
State to State. In Massachusetts, lor example, the requirements of 
more then one-third of the cases were $40-49-; and relatively few 
had requirements of less tiian |30 or more than |60 (table 2). At 
the other extreme, almost two-thirds of the cases in Tennessee were 
determined to have requirements of less than $20, and only about 
1 percent had requirements of $40 or more. Not only does the dis¬ 
tribution vary among States, but it also varies among recipients 
in each of the States, except for the flat-grant-minus-income cases 
in California. 

Some variation is to be expected in the amounts individuals 
need to live on. If substantial amounts for medical care were in¬ 
cluded, the individual requirements would differ greatly within a 
State. Considerable variation might be expected in States with both 
large urban centers end highly rural areas, where costs of shelter 
differ substantially. In all States, however, marked variation was 
found in the amounts of requirements not accounted lor by either of 
these factors. In West Virginia, for example, though no medical 
care was included, the total requirements of almost 11 percent of 
the cases were determined to be $10 to $14, while for somewhat more 
than 11 percent they ranged from $30 to $49. In the District of 
Columbia, an entirely urban area, medical care was included for very 
few cases; yet the requirements ranged from $1^ to $19 in O.4 percent 
of the cases to $60 or more in 1.9 percent of the cases. 


- 8 - 














ible 2,—^Percentage distribution of recipient-only cases with all requirements 
mown, by specified amount of total requirements, for 21 States in a month in 1944 


Percentage distribution of cases with 
total requirements of— 


S 

j 

Less 

than 

$20 

$ 20-29 

$ 30-39 

$40-49 

$ 50-59 

$60 

or more 

j Total l! . 

1 

5*9 

29.2 

33.1 

18.2 

8.6 

5.0 

1 

slifornia 2/. 

... 




60.9 

39.1 

Istrict of Columbia. 

.4 

10.9 

53.7 

25.8 

7.4 

1.9 

Ilinois. 

1.2 

26.9 

42.7 

27.7 

.9 

.7 

aaeas. 

7.1 

47.2 

31.7 

10.9 

2.2 

.9 

aine. 

5.8 

28.3 

38.8 

20.8 

3.0 

3.3 

lassachusetts. 

( 3 ) 

7.2 

24.2 

33.9 

22.9 

11.7 

Ichigan. 

1.3 

28.2 

43.5 

21.9 

3.5 

1.5 

lime so ta. 

2.0 

32.5 

41.5 

22.3 

1.2 

.4 

Ississippi. 

15.3 

71.2 

10.9 

2.1 

.3 

.3 

issouri. 

8.1 

42.4 

39.3 

6.8 

2.1 

1.2 

on tana. 

( 3 ) 

10.2 

62.1 

21.5 

2.9 

3.3 

ew Hampshire. 

4,g 

35.3 

43.2 

12.9 

2.1 

1.8 

ew Mexico. 

1.3 

48.2 

36.9 

9.4 

2.8 

1.3 

Orth Carolina. 

3.4 

63.4 

28.2 

3.9 

.7 

.4 

orth Dakota. 

— 

14.7 

57.6 

20.6 

3.1- 

4.0 

Iclahoma. 

3.2 

38.6 

42.2 

13.9 

1.2 

.3 

hode Island. 

2.7 

11.2 

34.1 

43.9 

6.2 

1.8 

ennessee. 

64.6 

30.4 

3.9 

.8 

.2 

— 

ermont. 

2.7 

34.7 

43.4 

11.0 

3.9 

4.3 

irginia. 

28.7 

46.0 

20.1 

3.5 

1.2 

.4 

eat Virginia. 

35.6 

53.2 

9.2 

2.1 




/ Excludes flat-grant cases in California, for which payments were determined by 
deducting income, if any, from $5^. 

/ Represents budget cases for which payments were determined, within the $50 
maximum, by deducting income from the amount of total need computed according 
to a standard budgetary guide, 

/ Less than 0,05 percent. 





































IV. INCOME 


As has already been indicated, the Social Security Act re¬ 
quires that in determining need lor old-age assistance the State 
agency shall talce into account any income and resources oi the per¬ 
son requesting assistance. Such income may be in the form of cash 
or of goods or services available to recipients without cost. The 
Bureau of Public Assistance has alv/ays recommended that, in inter¬ 
preting this requirement, the income or resource should be real 
and available to meet in part the needs of the recipient. 


CASH INCOIuE OTHER TIM ASSISTANCE 

This section of the report presents data on cash income that 
v;as considered in determining the ajnount of assistance. Table 4 
shows the percentage of cases with cash income and the distribution 
of cases and of income by type ol assistance case. 


Table 4-—Distribution oi cases with cash income other than 
assistance, and of such cash income, by type oi case, 
for 21 States in a month in 1944 


Type 

of 

case 

All cases 

Cases v'ltli 
cash income 

Amount of 
cash income 

Number 

Percent¬ 

age 

distri¬ 

bution 

Number 

Percent 
of all 

cases 

Total 

Percent¬ 

age 

distri¬ 

bution 

Total. 

374.906 

100.0 


26.8 

S3.57i.971 

100.0 

Recipient only. 
Recipient and 

7a,39f> 

84.7 

159,560 

21.3 

1,821,373 

30.9 

spouse only.. 
Recipient and 
others, with 
or without 

83,163 

9.5 

43,037 

31.8 

624,041 

17.3 

spouse 

50,348 

5.8 

32,103 

63.8 

1 , 130,332 

31.6 


- 12 - 


















As might be expected, the proportion of cases with cash in¬ 
come increased with the size of the assistance group. Slightly more 
than one-fiith of the recipient-only cases, and more than half those 
including recipient and spouse, had cash income other than assist¬ 
ance.^ For cases that included the recipient and others, with or 
without spouse, the proportion was almost two-thirds. Although this 
latter group constituted only 6 percent of all cases in the study, 
the group had almost one-third of the total cash incoflie. Five States 
had no assistance cases falling in this classification> and in a 
few States the number was relatively small. Significant State dif¬ 
ferences, therefore, are reflected more closely if cases that con¬ 
sisted of the recipient only and those including the recipient and 
spouse are considered separately. 

Cash Income of Recipient-Only Cases 

Slightly more than one-fifth of the recipient-only cases hfd 
cash income from soui’ces other than assistance. The proportion 
ranged from about 7 percent in West Virginia to approximately 4 O 
percent in the adjoining State of Virginia (table 5). The wide 
range and the position of the States in the array are somewhat 
difficult to explain. It might have been assu:Tied that relatively 
more recipients would have cash income of their own in States where 
assistance standards as reflected by average requirements are moder¬ 
ately high, since more cases with some income would presumably be 
eligible in those States. In some States with low average require¬ 
ments, however, large proportions of the recipients were rexjorted 
as having cash income. The four States that reported the largest 
proportion of recipients with cash income—Virginia, Missouri, 
Mississippi, and Nortli Caroline.—are among those with relatively 
low average requirements. 

On the other hand, Tennessee and West Virginia, which also 
had low average requirements, reported that only 19 and 7 percent, 
respectively, of their recipients had cash income. 

Variations that cannot be explained also occurred among 
States with relatively high average requirements. In Massachusetts, 
more than one-fourth of the recipient-only cases had some cash in¬ 
come otbier than assistance. In California, which ranked highest 
in average requirements of recipients, only one aged person in five 
had cash income that w'as considered a resource in determining need. 
Riiode Island, which ranked third in the ainount of average require¬ 
ments of recipient-only cases, reported only one recipient in eight 
with cash income other tliEin assistance. 


^ For States that prepared a separate budget for each eligible in¬ 
dividual, husbands and wives each receiving old-age assistance 
are classified as recipient-only cases. 


- 13 - 


786346 0 - 48 -3 






Table 3*—Percent of recipient-only cases vith cash income 
other than assistance, and average amount of such income, 
for 21 States in a month in 19H4 


State 

Cases with cash 
income other 
than assistance 

Average per case for— 

Percent 
of all 

cases 

State 

rank 

All 

recipient- 
only cases 

Recipient- 
only cases 
with cash 
income 
other than 
assistance 

Total. 

21.5 

— 

$2.46 

$11.42 

Virginia.. 

39.5 

-1 

3.74 

9.46 

Missouri. 

3^.7 

2 

3.10 

8.94 

Mississippi. 

30.1 

3 

. 1.65 

5.^7 

North Carolina. 

29.1 

4 

2.16 

7.43 

Massachusetts. 

27.4 

5 

4.94 

18.01 

Xsjisas. 

25.5 

6 

' 1.91 

7.50 

Michigan.. 

24.8 

7 

2.55 

10.28 

Vermont. 

23.8 

8 

3.12 

13.08 

District of Columbia.. 

21.5 

9 

3.04 

14.13 

Montana. 

21.5 

10 

2.33 

10.85 

California. 

21.0 

11 

3.39 

16.11 

North Dakota. 

20.9 

12 

2.21 

10.58 

Tennessee. 

19.4 

13 

.79 

4.06 

Illinois. 

18.6 

14 

1.69 

9.09 

New Hampshire. 

14.6 

15 

1.45 

9.98 

Minnesota. 

13.6 

16 

1.29 

9.52 

New Mexico. 

12.6 

17 

.72 

5.73 

Maine. 

12.5 

18 

1 . 7 s 

14.28 

Bhode Island. 

12.2 

19 

2.08 

17.06 

Oklahoma. 

11.7 

20 

.93 

7.91 

West Virginia. 

6.7 

21 

.41 

(1) 


y Not computed because number of cases included in this claasification 
in sample was less than ^0, 


- U - 



































These wide differences undoubtedly reflect, in part, varia¬ 
tions in policies and practices with respect to consideration and 
evaluation of income. An examination of data on the average amount 
of cash income of recipient-only cases throws some light on these 
differences. For all such cases in the 21 States the average cash 
income was only $ 2 . 46 . For cases with cash income the average was 
$ 11 . 42 , with the highest averages occurring in the wealthier States. 
The average for Massachusetts was $13; for Rhode Island, $17; and 
for California, $16. 

In Virginia, Missouri, and North Carolina, ^ich had a large 
proportion of cases with cash income, the averages for such cases 
were about half those in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and California. 
Mississippi's average was about one-third that in each of these 
States. Three of the States in which a high proportion of the cases 
had cash income—Virginia, Mississippi, and North Carolina—have 
very limited funds for assistance. In an effort to spread assist¬ 
ance funds as far as possible among all recipients, these States 
may have considered very small amounts of income that did not con¬ 
tribute materially to meeting the needs of recipients on a continuing 
basis. 

Source of Cash Income of Recipient-Only Cases 

Recipients derived their cash income, other than that pro¬ 
vided through assistance, from a variety of sources, such as earn¬ 
ings, contributions from relatives, servicemen's allowances, benefits 
under the program of old-age and survivors insurance, and income 
from property. The various types of income were not eqxially impor¬ 
tant as a resource, whether measured in terms of the number of re¬ 
cipients with income from a particular source or in terms of the 
amount of that income. The following discussion, limited to cases 
of recipients only, attempts to evaluate the relative importance of 
several types of cash income from both these standpoints. In some 
instances the importance of a particular source varies with the 
composition of the assistance case. 

Earnings .—Despite the handicap age places on employability, 

5 percent of the recipients in the 20 States for which, data are 
available had income from employment (table 6). Average earnings 
for recipients with earnings were $8.27 (table 7). The average 
ranged from $3-55 in Tennessee to $ 13.64 in Massachusetts and $13.72 
in the District of Columbia. Income from earnings represented 17 
percent of all cash income other than assistance. 

The proportion of cases with income from earnings ranged from 
2 percent in California, Minnesota, Rhode Island, and West Virginia 
to approximately I 6 percent in North Carolina and Virginia (table 6). 
Although there doubtless was some variation among the States in em¬ 
ployment conditions in 1944, this would not appear to account for the 
wide range in the proportion of recipients with earnings. Reports 


- 15 - 




Tal>le 6 .-«-Ferceiit of recipient •only cases with cash income other than assistance from specified 

sources for 20 States in a month in 1944 


z 

<M 

« 

a 

o 

o 

d 

•H 

cd 

o 

■*> 


o 

M 

at 

o 

Vi 

O 

d 

9 

o 

u 

9 


(4 

J3 

O 


•H 1 • 

5 Sc 

Vi 


C 

.O 


CO 

VO 


o^ 


r^vo VO CM CO 

• • * • • 

VO iH VO ir\ 


KM^vO 

• • • • • 

^ cr\vo in<d- 


cvj<=»' r—cvj CO 

• • « • • 

r<^vO ifv 


U^CVl CO K\#-» 

t • • • • 

ro VO cvj 


^ VO 
KN H rH 


VO 


h-O 




i 1 

i " 

11:39 

CO 


K\ 

O 


iH| liHCVJ VDICOCVJI 

• •••« •••!• •ii** 


i> I: 

^ CD "ti 
O ^ »4 


CTi 


O KMO ino 

• * • • • 

O v£> VO rH ^ 


K\r^CTV CVI C7V 

o • • • ■ 

CO rH CVI O 


CO CVJ KV rH CO 

• • • • • 

ifvcvj Kvr^ 


CVJ CVJ CVJ 

» • • « • 

iTiin CO CVJ CVJ 
CVJ 


I 

u « 


o « 
« 2 ® 
. •H ^ 


S S’ 


« 

m 


CVJ 


h-irvo CVJ 

• • • • 

^ r^O K\ 


(TV rH o VO CO 

« • • • • 

CVJ^ CVJ ^ CVJ 


VO r^crv CVJ CO 

• • • • • 

^ iTvirvco ^ 


CO IfVVO VO o 

• • • • • 

rH crv O irv CVJ 


d 

o 


« 

8 5 


o 

e 


UPl 

• 

rH 

CU 


O irvvD irv ifv 

• • • • • 

rH rH CO ITv CVJ 
CVJ CVJ rH CVJ rH 


^COvOrHl^ 

• • • • • 

h—-It ro O 

CVJ CVJ rH KVr^S 


vo ^o rH o^ 

^ CVJ (TV O rH 
rH rH ra CVJ rH 


cvJjd-coirvh- 

• • • • • 

CVJ cr* Kvcrvvo 
rH rH CU 


Dt § • 3 « S 
O ® Jd 55 •H 2 

S ^ 5 « 9 

» «4 


»rv 

CO 


O Ifv^ IfMfV 

• • • • • 

0^ CO rH ^ h— 

CO CO 


VO CU ^ <Tv 
• ■ • • • 

CU irv VO CTV IT* 

1 ^ r— CO vo VO 


^ ;d’ CTV rH r<V 

• • * • • 

irv O <Tv 

CO CO h- CO 


CO VO CU irvKv 

• • • o • 

r ~-0 VD o KV 
CO CO r^vo CTv 


® O Vi 


irv 

r^ 


8 r«Mrvo irv 
Kvcu irv CO 

CU r--arv-d- CO 

m m m m m 

CU irv i»-ov 

irv CU rH 




vO CU 

^ irvKv (TV irv 

« •> « 

irv irvvo 


o irvo o irv 
^ CO o ^ CU 
3 - CTV ov 3 - 


rH irvvO O Q 
VO CU r>-<d‘ ® 

o KV03-VO 


• •> 

CO 
rH ^ 

» m 

-d- CU 

21. 

m • 

iTvcrv 

irv 

«C dC dc 

irv 

CU 

• 9 

• • 

• 

• 

• 

• 

9 « 

• • 

• • 

• 

• 

• 

• 

9 

• • 

« • 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 9 

• • 

• • 

• 

• 

• 

% 

• • 


• • 

• 

* 

• 

• 

• 9 

• • 

« • 

D • 

• e 

• 

• 

• 

• 

s 

• 

• 

• 

• * 

9 9 

• • 

• • 

• • 

• • 

« 

d 

• 

• 

* 

• 

• 

• 

• 9 

9 s 

• • 

9 * 

d 

• 

• 

9 

• 9 

• • 

Ih • 

•H 

d 

• 

'd 

9 

•H • 

•H • 

rH 

■p 

• 

d 

9 

PC • 

4:1 0 

0 

p 

• 

d 

9 • 

Pi • 

9 t> 

u 

H 

9 

rH 

9 • 

•H •iH 

Pi •h 

d 

9 

d 

9 

9 • 

9 J 4 

a H 

0 

n 

n 

M 

9 +> 

9 d 

d 9 



0 


9 d 

•H 0 

» X 




9 

9 0 

9 9 


•p 


«8 

•d 


9 9 

> > 

J4 

u 

rH 

0 

d u 

•H •ri 

9 9 

0 

0 

M 

0 

9 9 

X :s: 

izi SQ 

I3i 


0 

« 

£4 > 


4> 

d 

4 * 

in 


rH 

d 

*» 

o 

e^ 


d 

•H 


o 
o 

d o 


d 4> « 
U O tA 
o •H o 
•M >4 d 


ta 

d 9 
• d 


rH 9 rH d 
d •H rH d d 

o c:) »-i M S 


m 

■p 

-P 

9 

a 

S 

d 

9 

9 

d 


9 


d 
•H 
d 
•H 
CO 

d u 

•H "H 

d > 

•rl 

CO -P 
IH 9 
Tt 9 


- 16 - 


1 / Excludes Montana, for \<hich comparable data on source of income are not arallahle 










































Tal>l 6 J • —~A'yftrft g ft caBh income other than assistance and percentage 
distribution of income by type of case and source of income, 

in a month in 19^4 



All cases 

Cases with cash 
income other 
than assistance 

Source of income 

Recipient 
only l/ 

Recipient and 
spouse ^ 

Recipient 
only 1/ 

Recipient 


Average 

per 

case 

Percent¬ 

age 

distri¬ 

bution 

Average 

per 

case 

Percent¬ 

age 

distri¬ 

bution 

and 

spouse 2/ 

Total. 

$ 2.46 

100.0 

$7 .**9 

100.0 

$ 11.42 

$ 14.43 

Earnings of- 

Recipient. 

Other person in 
assistance group 
Contributions from 

relatives. 

Servicemen*8 

allowances. 

OASI benefits. 

Other. 

.42 

.98 

.06 

.31 

.68 

17.2 

40.0 

2.5 

12.8 

27.6 

2.40 

1.50 

1.16 

.32 

.41 

1.69 

32.0 

20.1 

15.5 

4.2 

5.5 
22.6 

8.27 

10.83 

22.28 
16 .89 
9.96 

11.32 

12.26 

9.31 

30.42 

23.68 

11.27 


1 / 20 States; excludes Montana, for which comparable data on source of Income are 

' 2 / excludes Montana and 5 States that made separate budgets for each 

eligible Individual. 



- 17 - 




























from a few agencies that made the study indicate that, for some cases, 
the amount of income reported from earnings or other sources may have 
been in excess of that actually available. One agency remarked that 
small amounts of temporary or intermittent cash resources were too 
frequently considered as existing permanently; another agency indi- 1 
cated that the amounts of cash income from earnings seemed to be 
overstated in many instances. Similar situations have been found 
in some other States or local areas. 

Cash contributions from relatives .—Contributions from rel¬ 
atives constituted the most important source of cash income other 
than assistance, from the standpoint of both the number of cases in 
which such income was taJcen into account and the amount of this in¬ 
come. Tlie significance of income from relatives varied widely among 
the States. Part of the variation doubtless stemmed from differences 
in the ability of relatives to assist their aged kin. On the other 
hand, some of the differences are attributable to specific provisions 
of State laws or agency policies regarding the responsibility of rel¬ 
atives. A few States set up objective scales for amounts of contri¬ 
butions bgsed on the relative's income, number of other dependents, 
and other financial responsibilities. In other States, agencies have 
policies to be followed on an individual-case basis in exploring this 
resource. 

Somewhat less than one-tenth of all cases were shown as re¬ 
ceiving cash contributions from relatives (table'6), and the average 
contribution amounted to about $11 a month (table 7). Income from 
this source represented 40 percent of the cash income, other than 
assist£ince, availa^ble. Most of the States with a high proportion of 
recipients with cash income from earnings ranked'high also in the 
relative number who received contributions from relatives (table 6). 
These States included some with comparatively low economic resources, 
v/here it may be assumed that relatives are least able to make regular 
cash contributions to recipients and v:here assistance pa.yments are 
low. In Virginia, such contributions were considered a resource of 
more than one-fifth oi the recit-dents. In Mississippi and North 
Carolina, also, comparatively high proportions of recipients were 
reported as receiving cash income from relatives. The average con¬ 
tribution—from 15.00 to ^7.50 in these States— v:as considerably less 
than in some of the States vdth comparatively large economic resources. 
In contrast, some other States in which per capita income was low re¬ 
ported relatively few recipients with contributions from relatives, 
and even when such support was provided the amounts were small. In 
Tennessee, New Mexico, V<est Virginia, ajid Oklahoma, only 5.4, 2.2, 2 . 2 , 
and 0.8 percent, respectively, of the cases had such income. 

Among the States witn relatively high per capita incomes, where 
relatives would presmnably be better able to make cash contributions, 
the percentage of cases with sucn income varied widely. In Massachusett 
almost one-fifth; in California one-tenth; and in Rhode Island one- 
tv/entieth of the recipients had such income. The average contribution 
was substantial in these States—$13 per case receiving such contribu¬ 
tions in California and $16 in the other two States. 


- 18 - 





other cash in co me .—Other c&sh income included servicemen's 
allov/auces, old-age and survivors insurtnce benefits, said income from 
investments, annuities, or other sources. Relatively few recipients 
h&d income from servicemen's allowances. Some persons who had re¬ 
ceived old-age assistance left the rolls wiien the allowances became 
available, and doubtless others, who might have been in need, did 
not find it necessary to request assistance while receiving allow¬ 
ances. In the 20 States, only 0.3 percent of the cases received 
servicemen's allowances, and 3 States reported no income from this 
source. For the few cases receiving such income the average amount 
was 122.28. 

A somewhat larger proportion of recipients— 1,^ percent— 
received old-age and survivors insurance benefits, which averaged 
$16.89 per beneficiary. In general, the proportion receiving in¬ 
surance benefits w^as larger in the States with the highest industrial 
development and was extremelj^ small in some of the Southern and 
middle ’Western States. 

Some income from investments, rentals, annuities (other than 
old-age and survivors insurance), and other sources was received by 
6.8 percent of the cases. In the District of Colui-ibia and in '.Vest 
Virginia, about 2 percent had such income, while the percentage in 
Missouri, 14.6, w'as greatly in excess of that in any other State and 
is the principle reason for I.Iissouri's ranging second in the percent¬ 
age of cases with cash income. More than one-iourth of all cash in¬ 
come, excluding assistance, came from these sources, and the average 
amount per case wdth such income was approximately $10. 

Cash Income of Cases That Included Recipient and Spouse 

Of the cases that included tlie recipient and spouse, more than 
half had cash income other than assistance, as compared wdth slightly 
more than one-fifth of the recipient-only cases (tables 3 end 8). 

The greatest differences between the two groups were in tne propor¬ 
tions with income from earnings and from other sources, such as in¬ 
vestments, rentals, and annuities (other than old-age and survivors 
insurance). Recipients in cases that included husband and wife were 
doubtless younger on the average than those in the recipient-only 
group. Moreover, these cases generally included the person who had 

been the family's chief breadwinner and who may have continued to 

have slight earning capacity. Although, in recipient-ouly cases, 
the recipient frequently had been the fandly wage earner, the group 
includes a substantial number of unattached w'omen with little or no 
earning capacity. 

In recipient-and-vspouse cases the recipient had earnings in 
more than 20 percent, and the spouse in 12 percent, of the cases.2/ 
Fifteen percent of the recipient-and-spouse caises had "other" income, 
as compared with 7 percent of the recipient-only ca^-es. This differ¬ 
ence was to be expected since normal family units are xnov.n to be 

more likely to conserve their resources than .are unattached individuals. 


2/ In some cases the spouse elso v/as a recipient. See the appendix, p. 42. 


- 19 - 









Table 8 .—Percent of recipient-and-spouse cases with cash income other 
than assistance, and average amount of cash income, for 
l 6 States in a month in 19^4 


State 

Cases with 
cash income 
other than 
assistance 

Average per case for-- 

Percent 

of 

all 

cases 

State 

rank 

All 

recipient- 

and-spouse 

cases 

Recipient- 

and-spouse 

cases 

with cash 
income 
other than 
assistance 

Total 1 /. 

51.8 

-- 

$ 7.50 

$ 14.49 

Virginia. 

75.3 

1 

11.10 

14.73 

Missouri.. 

70.7 

2 

11.83 

16.72 

North Carolina. 

69.9 

3 

8.99 

12.87 

Mississippi. 

69.5 

4 

7.60 

10.94 

Tennessee. 

kS,0 

5 

3.32 

6.93 

Vermont. 

k6.h. 

6 

6.74 

(2/) 

Montana. 

i^5.1 

7 

7.96 

17.65 

Massachusetts.. 

14^.9 

8 

12.11 

26.98 

Kansas. 

i^2.8 

9 

5.03 

11.77 

North Dakota.... 

1 ^ 2.5 

• 10 

7.86 

18.52 

Rhode Island. 

31.2 

11 

9.01 

(2/) 

Maine. 

31.0 

12 

5.74 

18.50 

New Hampshire. 

29 A 

13 

4.05 

(2/) 

Oklahoma. 

29.2 

14 

3.64 

12.44 

New Mexico. 

26.0 

15 

3.40 

13.09 

West Virginia. 

18.0 

16 

1 . 3 ^ 

(2/) 


1 / Excludes 5 States that made separate budgets for each eligible 
individual. 

2 / Not computed because number of cases included in this classification 
in sample was less than 50 . 


- 20 - 































I 

Average cash income of cases that included the recipient's 

I spouse was considerably higher than that for recipient-only cases. 

For these two types ol cases with cash income, the averages v/ere 
$ 14.43 and $ 11 . 42 , respectively. If the averages are computed on 
the basis of the total number 01 cases in each group, the differen¬ 
tial is 3 to Ij or $ 7.49 in contrast to $2.46 (table 7). 

The relative importance of each type of income varied con¬ 
siderably between the two groups. For example, earnings in recipient- 
only cases represented 17 percent of the cash income from sources 
other than assistance. In cases consisting of the recipient and 

I spouse, which had relatively more employment, 32 percent of the cash 

income was from earnings of the recipient and an additional 20 per¬ 
cent from earnings of the spouse. Income from contributions of 
relatives represented a smaller share of toteil income for recipient- 
and-spouse cases, even though proportionately more of them thrn of 
recipient-only cases received such income. 

Data showing the percentage of recipient-end-spouse cases 
v/ith cash income from sources other than assistance are presented 
by source for each State in table 9. The State variations in the 
relative number of cases with such income and in the sources of in¬ 
come are similar to those foi recipient-only cases. 

TOT/^X CASH INCOME INCLUDING ASSISTANCE 

Total cash income available to meet the needs of assistance 
cases averaged $33.33 for the 21 States combined. For cases in which 
the requirements of only one recipient were included in the budget, 
the average amount of cash income, including assistence, was $34.13 
(table 10). This cash income does not represent all that the re¬ 
cipients had to live on, since more than a third had income in kind, 
in the form of rent-free shelter, garden or farm produce, fuel, or 
other goods or services. The exact proportion of total income repre¬ 
sented by income in kind is not Known, because not all States placed 
a money value on income in kind. The proportion ol cr-‘ses receiving- 
income in kind, and an indication of the value for selected States, 
is discussed later. 

The average cash income of $34*13 for recipient-only cases was 
heavily weighted by cases in Calilornia and Massachusetts where a 
large number of recipients had high average cash incomes. The average 
for California was $30.39 end for Massachusetts, $43.31 (table 10). 

In only two additional States—North Dakota and Rhode Island—did 
the average exceed that for all States combined. For 12 vStates the 
average cash income per recipient ranged from $23 to $34* lu the 
other 3 States the average ranged from $13 to |16. The range among 
the States reflects differences in standards of assistance, in some 


21 - 






■P 

A 

S § 


(d 

5 


IS 

00 

o 


.d m 

+> «) 
«H 4^ 

> 40 
•P 
00 CO 
0) 

8» 

u 

0) ^ 
00 Vi 

§ ^ 
Pi 00 
00 0) 

li 

I n 
p 

d •d 
«> o 

p p 
Pi Vi 
P P 

o o 

e K 

00 


Sf; 

o 

O 9) 

U o 

£ 9 

• P 
I 00 

• p 

(7n 00 

CO 

O 00 
r-i 

■S 

E-i 


0 


a 


o 


o 

1 

d 

1 

p 


XI 

d 

0 

Vi 

0 


o 

0 


O 

XI 

d 

p 

0 

p 

p 

> 

0 


p 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 

0 


o 

§ 

Vi 

XI 

O 

p 

P 

d 

d 

0 

0 

X3 

o 

P 

d 

O 

0 


fd 



U 

<D 

Xi 

P 

O 


M 0) (0 
CO d p 
< 0) P 
O ,0 Vi 


1 

( 1 ) 

O 00 


> 

<D S 
CO 


I 

> 00 

- o a) 

d H o 

*■3 § 


I 

p d _ I w 

d O 6 C0 0) 

P P O H >■ 

d p d a> p 

O d V) d p 

o 


I 

I 

<d 

O 

00 

bO 

d 

p 

e 

p>q 


0 


0 

(NO 

d 

• 

o 

CM 

CU 

fH 

CO 



I 

Pi P 
P d 
O 0 
0 P 
« 


d 

O 

0 

8 


0 

0 

0 o 

o 
m 


a 


^ 0 

m a 

d O 
o o 
d 

o P 


§ 

p 

d 

0 

Si 

p 

o 


p 

m 

p 

0 

0 

0 



d 




p 

0 


0 

o 

0 

X 

Vi 

0 

CO 

P 


O 

0 


P 

3 


0 

P 

B 

d 


O 

00 


0 

P 

0 

P 

CO 


lA 

P 


CX) 

fH 


ir\ 

OJ 


OJ 

• 

rS 

OJ 


On 

• 

H 

lA 


CO 


J-CJnCOOnCVJ CO CO O VO 


ON On 00 CM 
cn 


coco C7N o C- 


-4- H -:t CO O 
lA t^CO CM 00 


-4 H O 


I CO 

I 

H CO CJN I H 


O I -4- lA-4 

• I ♦ • • 

lA I H P 


CM 00 P On-4 

• • • • • 

VD CM P 


P O 00 P VC 

• • • • • 

P P P 


VD lA O 00 lA 

• • • • • 

CM P CM CM 


00 CM CM VO 

• • • • • 

P CO 


OOfOCJNOP 00-4-CM COVO CT\ C— lA lA 


CJ\-4 CM CO CO 
CM CM P 


00 CO-4- CM 
CM P 


o cyN-4- CO p 

P P -4 


VO P t-- O VD 

• • • • • 

t- O CO ON t- 
P P P 


ITN j 4 00 CO lA 

• • • • ♦ 

t--,4 O P -4 
CM P 


O .4 t-- P lA 

00 CM CO CM P 

P P CM 


VD r- P CO CM ONOO o t-- o 


On 00 -4 VO -4 
P CO CM 


VO (On C-- CO lA 
CO p P 


CM lA CM CO 

• • • • • 

CM VD ON P C- 
CM CO 


00O(0\lAt— -4O<0NlACM CMOCOCOO 


CM P -4 ON O 
^ CO-4 VO 


ONVO (ON CM On 
CM CM VO -4 CM 


P CO VO lACO 
CO-4 -4 C-— P 


CMOPACO VOOPL^'.OO O 


CJN lA O (On 
AVO A CO CM 


O -4 O O 
r— t-— CO A t^ 


00 CM CO-4 CM 
VO A A CM CO 


O O Q O VO 
O CO O CO P 
ON A (On COVO 

•« Vy -V Vv *\ 

VO CM -4 A CM 
CM 


O O O MO O 
VO CM CO ^ A 
(OnO t-VO P 

•n •v 

P A P CM 


-4 O CM -4 A 
00 VO O VO P 
t--VD A-4 ON 


(On 


CM CO 


V> 

o 


0 


0 
0 0 
0 d 
d p 
0 0 


0 

• 

• 

0 

• 

d 

• * 

0 • 

• 

'Ki 

• 

• 

• 

0 

P 

• 

• 

d 

• 

p 

• 

• 

• 

P 

P 

p 

• 

P 

• 

p 

P • 

d 

• 

• 

• 

d 

0 

Pi 

• 

XI 

O 

o 

o • 

0 

• 

• 

• 

p 

0 

Pi 

♦ 

0 

o 

d 

^ 0 

P 

0 

• 

• 

w 

d 

P 

p 

|i 

p 

0 

0 

0 

• 

0 

d 

X! 

0 

d 

X 

o 


P 

0 

P 

P 

P 

o 

0 

d 

w 

0 


o 


0 

d 

d 

> 

0 

P 

O 

s 

xi 

X X 

0 

0 

o 

p 


0 

0 

0 



p 

P 0 

'd 

d 

s 


P 

0 

0 

0 

> 

> 

d 


o 

d 

M 

d 

0 

0 

•H 

P 

0 

0 

O 

X 

0 


P 

0 

s 

s 

X 




O 

S 

B 


> 



- 22 - 


l/ Excludes Montana, for which comparable data on source of income are not available and 5 States that 
made separate budgets for each eligible individual. 





































SteteF lirnitations^imposed by maximums on individual payments and in 
others, inability to make pajmients to meet the iull amount ol the 
budget deficit. 


Variations in the amount of average assistance payments were 
largely responsible for differences in the proportion of cash income 
irora each source. For recipient-only cases, for example, average 
cash income from sources other than assistance vifas approximately the 
same for North Dakota and North Carolina—^2.21 and |2.l6, respectively. 
Because assistance paynients in North Dakota averaged $33*27 for re¬ 
cipient-only cases, the $2.21 from other sources represented only 6 
percent of total cash income; in North Carolina, where assistance pay¬ 
ments averaged only $10.46, cash income from other sources represented 
17 percent of- total cash income. In five other States, cash income 
other than assistance represented 10 percent or more of total cash 
income, and in Virginia it amounted to 23 percent (table 10). 

The average total cash income and other financial data for 
recipient-only cases are not fully comparable for all States, because 
of differences in budgetary policy, as stated previously, in Cali¬ 
fornia, the District of Columbia, Illinois, Michigan, and Minnesota, 
a separate budget was prepared for each eligible individual in a 
family. The combined requirements of tY;o individuals living together 
are usually less than those for two maintaining separate establish¬ 
ments, and result in a lower average assistance payment to recipients 
with such living arrangements than to recipients living alone. If 
ca.ses in which two recipients lived in one household had been elimi¬ 
nated before the averages were computed in the District of Columbia, 
Illinois, ilichigan, and Minnesota, the average amount of total cash 
income for the rest of the recipient-only cases in each of these 
States would have been somewhat higher. The same may be true for 
those cases in California for which need was determined on a budg¬ 
etary basis. Hov^ever, total income of a large proportion of the 
cases in this State was governed by the provision that assistance 
plus other income must amount to at least $50 for each eligible 
individual. 

In Oklahoma, at the time the study was made, a separate budget 
was usually prepared for each eligible individual in the family, and 
in Massachusetts and Vermont tnis practice was followed frequently. 

As a result, averages for recipient-only cases in these States also 
are somewhat understated. 

The range among the States in average total cash income of 
cases consisting of the recipient and spouse was similar to that for 
recipient-only cases (table 11). Of the 21 States, 16 included the 
requirements of both recipient and spouse in a single budget. The 
States with lowest average cash income had relatively large numbers 
of cases. This resulted in an average of $39.04 for the 16 States 
combined that v/as lower than tne averages of 10 of them. Average 


• - 23 - 




Table 10-Average cash income, including assistance, of recipient-only cases, 
by source of income, for 21 States in a month in 19^^ 


State 

State 

rank 

Average amount 

Percentage distributior 

Total 

Assist¬ 

ance 

payments 

Other 

cash 

income 

Total 

Assist¬ 

ance 

payments 

Other 

cash 

income 

Total. 

-- 


$ 31.67 

$2.46 

100.0 

92.8 

7.2 

California. 

1 

50.59 

47.20 

3.39 

100.0 

93.3 

6.7 

Massachusetts. 

2 

i+5.8l 

40.87 

4.94 

100.0 

89.2 

10.8 

North Dakota. 

3 

35.W 

33.27 

2.21 

100.0 

93.8 

6.2 • 

Rhode Island. 

4 

35.18 

33.10 

2.08 

100.0 

94.1 

5.9 

District of Columbia.. 

5 

33.90 

30.86 

3.04 

100.0 

91.0 

9.0 

Montana. 

6 

32.64 

30,31 

2.33 

100.0 

92.9 

7.1 

Illinois. 

7 

32.51 

30.82 

1.69 

100.0 

94.8 

5.2 

Mich-i gan. 

8 

31.96 

29.41 

2.55 

100.0 

92.0 

8.0 

Minnesota. 

9 

30.52 

29.23 

1.29 

100.0 

95.8 

4.2 

Maine. 

10 

29.87 

28.09 

1.78 

100.0 

94.0 

6.0 

New Hampshire. 

11 

28.72 

27.27 

1.45 

100.0 

95.0 

5.0 

Kansas. 

12 

27.56 

25.65 

1.91 

100.0 

93.1 

6.9 

New Mexico. 

13 

27.30 

26.58 

.72 

100.0 

97.4 

2.6 

Missouri. 

Ik 

27.03 

23.93 

3.10 ' 

100.0 

88.5 

11.5 

Vermont. 

15 

25.24 

22.12 

3.12 

100.0 

87.6 

12.4 

Oklahoma. 

16 

25.05 

24.12 

.93 

100.0 

96.3 

3.7 

Virginia. 

17 

16.38 

12.64 

3.74 

100.0 

77.2 

22.8 

West Virginia. 

18 

15.25 

14.84 

.41 

100.0 

97.3 

2.7 

Mississippi. 

19 

15.02 

13.37 

1.65 

100.0 

89.0 

11.0 

Tennessee. 

20 

14.65 

13.86 

.79 

100.0 

94.6 

5.4 

North Carolina. 

21 

12.62 

10.46 

2.16 

100.0 

82.8 

17.2 


- 24 - 







































Table 11 .--Average cash income, including assistance, of recipient-and-spouse 
cases, by source of income, for l 6 States in a month in 19 U 1 <- 


--—-—-- 

r 

^ State 

s 

State 

rank 

Average amount. 

Percentage distribution 

Total 

Assist¬ 

ance 

pajTnents 

Other 

cash 

income 

Total 

Assist¬ 

ance 

payments 

Other 

cash 

income 

Total 1 /. 

-- 

$ 39.04 

$31.54 

$7.50 

100.0 

80.8 

19.2 

Massachusetts. 

1 

Ik,32 

62.21 

12.11 

100.0 

83.7 

16.3 

Rhode Island. 

2 

62.88 

53 . 8 ? 

9.01 

100.0 

85.7 

14.3 

tTorth Dakota. 

3 

58.51 

50.65 

7.86 

100.0 

86.6 

13.4 

Montana. 

h 

52.63 

44.67 

7.96 

100.0 

84.9 

15.1 

[ Maine. 

5 

51.21 

45.47 

5.74 

100.0 

88.8 

11.2 

) 

) New Hampshire. 

6 

k9,6l 

45.56 

4.05 

100.0 

91.8 

8.2 

3 Missouri. 

7 

k3,Qk 

32.01 

11.83 

100.0 

73-0 

27.0 

j New Mexico. 

8 

^3.19 

39.79 

3.40 

100.0 

92.1 

7.9 

Kansas. 

9 

41.96 

36.93 

5.03 

100.0 

88.0 

12.0 

^ Vermont. 

10 

41.90 

35.16 

6.74 

100.0 

83.9 

16.1 

! Oklahoma. 

11 

38.85 

35-21 

3.64 

100.0 

90.6 

9.4 

’ Virginia. 

12 

27.97 

16.87 

11.10 

100.0 

60.3 

39.7 

) Mississippi. 

13 

24.81 

17.21 

7.60 

100.0 

69.4 

30.6 

1 Tennessee. 

Ik 

22.87 

19.55 

3.32 

100.0 

85.5 

14.5 

North Carolina. 

15 

22.38 

13.39 

8.99 

100.0 

59.8 

40.2 

West Virginia. 

16 

22.00 

20.66 

1.34 

100.0 

93.9 

6.1 


1 / Excludes 5 States that made separate budgets for each eligible individual. 


- 25 - 



































cash incOiTie for each of the 6 States at the top of the range was 
at least twice that for each of the 4 at the bottom. The average 
for Massachusetts was more than 3 tiiaes that in the 3 States at the 
lower end of the scale and was substcntially higher than that in 
any other State. In Massachusetts, where funds for assistance are 
relatively adequate, the amount of assistance plus other income 
that each recipient is to receive is underwritten by minimums 
specified in the State law, and there are no raaximums on individual 
payments. Moreover, the inclusion in the budget of amounts to meet 
the cost 01 relatively large medical bills for some recipients in 
this State tended to raise the average amount of total income., 

North Dakota, Rhode Island, and the District of Columbia, 
wnich ranked high in average amount of total cash income, also had 
no maximuras on individual payments. In North Dakota and Rhode 
Island the cost of medical care frequently was met through the 
money payment. In the District of Columbia, an urban area, medical 
care was provided largely by other agencies, and as a result the 
cash income of recipients was for maintenance needs only. Although 
Kansas had no maximums on individual payments, the average income 
was only $27.36 for recipient-only cases and $41*96 for cases that 
included the recipient's spouse. 

All States that had a raaximuiii of $30 on individual payments 
fell in the lower half of the range when States were arrayed by the 
average amount of total cash income of recipient-only cases. The 
fact that a number of States with a $40 Hiaximura, and New Mexico with 
a $30 maximum, also fell in the lower half indicates that the maxi¬ 
mum on individual assistance payments was not the only factor affect¬ 
ing the amount of cash income. Here again the controlling factors 
seem to be the differences in standards of assistance, in the appli¬ 
cation of the standards, and in the availability of funds to meet 
need in full. Also influencing the variations but to a lesser ex¬ 
tent was the degree of urbanization of the States, which affects 
the cost of certain goods and services, particularly tiie cost of 
shelter. 


Sources of Total Cash Income 


Assistance payments constituted the major share—38.3 percent— 
of the total cash income of old-age assistance cases in 20 of the 21 
States. As has been said previously, about one-fourth of the re¬ 
cipients had cash income from earnings or other sources, but the 
average amount per case receiving assistance was relatively low. In¬ 
come from these sources, which amounted to only 11.3 percent of the 
total, included cash income of other members of the assistance case 
in States where budgeting frequently was done on a family basis. For 
cases consisting of only one person, assistance payments constituted 
about 93 percent of total income in contrast to 81 percent for cases 
that included a recipient and spouse (table 12). 


- 26 - 






! Table 12.--Percentage distribution of cash Income, including assistance, from 
j specified sources by type of case, in a month in 19 ^ 4-4 

i 


! 

1 Source of cash income 

All cases l/ 

Recipient- 

only 

cases 1 / 

Recipient- 
and- 
spouse 
cases 2 / 

Total. 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

Assistance payments. 

88.5 

92.8 

80.7 

OAA to recipient. 

86.1 

92.7 

64.1 

OAA to other person in case. 

2.1 

— 

16.3 

1 Other assistance. 

.3 

.1 

.3 

Other income. 

Earnings of— 

11.5 

7.2 

19.3 

Recipient. 

2.0 

1.2 

6.2 

Other person. 

2.6 

— 

3.9 

Contributions from relatives.,.. 

2.9 

2.9 

3.0 

Servicemen’s allotments. 

.4 

.2 

.8 

OASI. 

.9 

.9 

1.1 

' All other. 

2.6 

2.0 

4.4 


I 1 / 20 States; excludes Montana because classification of cash income other than 
‘ assistance differs from that in other States. 

; 2 / 15 States; excludes Montana and 5 States that made separate budgets for each 
eligible individual.. 


Assistance other than old-age assistance represented an extremely small 
proportion of total cash income— 0.1 percent for recipient-only cases and 0.3 
percent for cases that Included the recipient euid spouse. The total assistance 
reported does not represent all assistance going into households in vhich 
recipients of old-age assistance lived. If it was the agency’s practice to 
prepare separate budgets for needy blind persons, children, or other persons 
in the household, the amount of such assistance was not Included. The data are 
significant, therefore, only for the one-recipient cases. Payments from general 
asalsteuice funds to supplement old-alge assistance were made to a very small 
number of recipient-only cases in nine States. In a few Instances, supplemental 
assistance was provided by private agencies or organizations. 


- 27 - 























The proportion of cash income from each source other than 
assistance was higher for cases that included the recipient and 
spouse than for recipient-onl 7 cases (table 12). Income from earn¬ 
ings accounted for a considerable part of this difference. 

The relative importance of cash income other than assist¬ 
ance in States with comparatively low assistance payments suggests 
that some cash income may sometimes have been included when it was 
not regularly available. On the other hand, some cash income of 
recipients was not considered in determining their needs in certain 
States. Six States exempted from consideration certain income from 
agricultural employment, as authorized by Federal law.10/ Since 
the number of recipients for whom such income was waived was small, 
and the amount of their earnings probably was not large, the pro¬ 
vision had a negligible effect on average income. 

Some States have adopted the policy of permitting a recipient 
with specified dependents to allocate certain amounts of income for 
their support. Income so allocated is not considered available to 
meet the recipient's own need. In three States, a substantial amount 
of the cash income of recipients was allocated to meet the needs of 
dependents not included in the assistance group. 



Percent of cases 

Average amount 


that allocated 

per case 


income to a 

making such 

State 

dependent 

allocation 

California.. 

2.0 

♦19.07 

Massachusetts.. 

2.2 

17.53 

Minnesota.. 

3.9 

15.36 


In California and Minnesota the budget included the require¬ 
ments of the recipient only, but income could be allocated to meet 
the needs of a spouse not eligible for old-age assistance or of 
other dependents. Although in a number of additional States cash 
income of the recipient could be allocated to meet the needs of 
dependents, Massachusetts was the only other State represented in 
the study in which appreciable amounts were so allocated. 


10/ Public Laws 43 and 67, 78th Congress, and Public Law 40, 79th 
Congress. 


- 28 - 









INCOME IN KIND 


The development of effective standards governing the treat¬ 
ment of resources in kind has been slow and in 1944 few States had 
such standards. Even in States that had developed State-wide 
policies the bases of evaluation may not have been uniformly under¬ 
stood by the workers in the local agency. If funds are meager, 
even very small amounts of income in kind are likely to be consid¬ 
ered in order that available funds may be spread as far as possible 
among all eligible persons. The agency in one State, in which a 
large proportion of the recipients were reported as having income 
in kind, comments that these data must be interpreted 7d.th caution 
because of a widespread tendency in that State to overvalue such 
income. 


According to the reports, more than one-third of the re¬ 
cipients in 20 States had income in kind. The proportion of cases 
with such income ranged from 9 percent in Massachusetts to 84 per¬ 
cent in North Carolina (table 13). In 3 States more than three- 
fourths, and in 4 States less than one-fourth, of the recipients 
were reported as having income in kind. 

Effect of Place of Residence and of Living 

Arrangements on Receipt of Income in Kind 

As might be expected, the relative number of cases with in¬ 
come in kind was higher in States in which a fairly large propor¬ 
tion of the recipients lived on farms. Five States in which more 
than one-fourth of the recipients lived on farms—^North Carolina, 
Mississippi, Virginia, Tennessee, and Missouri—ranked high in the 
proportion of cases with either free shelter or other types of in¬ 
come in- kind or wi-th both. All these States except Missouri also 
ranked high in -the proportion of cases in which the recipient was 
living with relatives. In Missouri, almost half the cases had 
produce or other types of income in kind, but the number with free 
shelter was relatively small. In three addi-bional S-bates—New 
Mexico, Oklahoma, and Vermon-b—-bhe proportion of cases wi-bh income 
in kind exceeded 50 percent. In -bhese S-bates, from 18 -bo 23 percent 
of the recipients lived on farms. 

Living arrangements of recipients are directly related to 
the prevalence of income in kind. Table 13 shows that when the re¬ 
cipient was living with relatives, shelter was usually provided 
without charge. 

Shelter Provided by Relatives 

Almost 15 percent of all recipients were given shelter by 
relatives, but State proportions varied widely. The extremes are 
represented by California and Mississippi, wi-bh 5 and 44 percent, 
respectively, of -the recipients ha-vlng -bhis type of income. 


- 29 - 






Table I 3 .—Percent of cases with income in kind, by type of income and selected 
factors affecting receipt of such income, for 20 States in a month in 1944 


State 

Percent of cases with specified 
type of income in kind 

Percent of 
cases livini^ 

Total 

Shelter 

Prod¬ 

uce 

On 

farms 

With 

sonsJ 

Percent l/ 

b tate 
rank 

Total 

Pro¬ 

vided 

by 

rela¬ 

tives 

Other 

provi¬ 

sion 

raised 
and 

con¬ 

sumed 

and 

other 

f. 

daug^< 

ters, 

or 

other 

relft- 

tivea 

Total 2 /. 

38.4 

— 

26.0 

14.8 

11.1 

21 .S 

15.5 

21.7 

North Carolina. 

83.7 

1 

59.1 

43.8 

15.3 

75.9 

43.3 

43.9, 

Mississippi. 

83.0 

2 

60.0 

44.4 

15.6 

66.2 

54.2 

4 i.o! 

New Mexico. 

77.0 

3 

72.2 

22.6 

49.6 

45.9 

22.5 

13.3 

Virginia. 

73.6 

4 

48.6 

31.9, 

16.7 

64 .R 

33.5 

33.4 

Oklahoma. 

65.8 

5 

60.1 

20.5 

39.7 

27.1 

17.6 

15 . 5 ; 

Tennessee. 

58.3 

6 

34.7 

26.4 

8.3 

38.7 

31.9 

36.8 

Missouri. 

53.0 

7 

8.8 

6.9 

1.9 

49.5 

27.0 

15.5 

Vermont. 

52.0 

8 

32.4 

27.9 

4.5 

34.2 

17.8 

31.8 

North Dakota. 

4l.g 

9 

21.3 

17.9 

3.4 

26.4 

10.0 

19.8 

Kansas. 

38.3 

10 

19.7 

l4.0 

5.7 

25.6 

8.5 

14.0 

Maine. 

37.3 

11 

30.4 

25.9 

4.5 

8.7 

19.1 

26.5 

Michigan. 

31.8 

12 

23.1 

I8.3 

4.8 

14.7 

10.7 

20.5 

West Virginia. 

31.3 

13 

11.0 

6 . 3 - 

4.7 

22.5 

23.2 

• 16.0 

Minnesota. 

30.0 

14 

18.6 

14.6 

4.0 

17.5 

15-7 

20.9 

California. 

26.9 

15 

25.2 

5.4 

19.8 

3.7 

4.4 

17.1 

Rhode Isldjid. 

25.7 

16 

18.9 

16.5 

2.4 

10.5 

2.0 

21.7 

New Hampshire. 

24.9 

17 

17.7 

14.5 

3-3 

12.7 

12.3 

19.6 

Illinois. 

20.0 

18 

14.9 

11.2 

3.8 

6.4 

8.3 

22.6 

District of Columbia. 

17.6 

19 

9.1 

8.0 

1.1 

9.2 

0 

20.4 

Massachusetts. 

9.0 

20 

6.9 

6.0 

.9 

2.7 

2.2 

23.2 


1 / Represents percent with income in kind from’ one or more sources. 

^ Excludes Montana, for which comparable data are not available. 


- 30 - 














































Although, in general, relatives in the States with rela¬ 
tively low economic resoxirces are presumably less able to provide 
shelter without cost to recipients than those in States with greater 
resources, relatives actually were providing free shelter to a high 
proportion of recipients in the low-income States. It is evident 
that, where funds for assistance are very inadequate and assistance 
payments low, recipients have little choice as to living arrange¬ 
ments and relatives who share their homes with recipients frequently 
do so at considerable sacrifice. 

On the other hand, it is apparent that in several States an 
amount was included in the budget for shelter for many recipients 
who lived with relatives. Although almost one-fourth of the re¬ 
cipients in Massachusetts lived with relatives, only 6 percent of 
all recipients got shelter without cost. In this State, contribu¬ 
tions of responsible relatives are determined on the basis of a 
fixed scale that considers both income and living arrangements 
of the relatives. In California, where 17 percent of the recipients 
lived with relatives, shelter was given without cost in only 5 per¬ 
cent of all cases. In a number of other States, and particularly 
in the District of Colmbia, Illinois, West Virginia, and Missouri, 
it is evident that amounts were frequently included in budgets to 
meet the cost of shelter of recipients who lived with relatives. 


Other Shelter Provisions 


It may be assumed that most of tne cases with free shelter^ 
that was not provided by relatives, owned their own homes, although 
in some instances shelter was received in return for work performed, 
and occasionally persons other than relatives provided shelter with¬ 
out cost to recipients. The number of cases that were reported as 
having "other provisions” for shelter, however, may represent an 
understatement of the extent of home ownership. According to in¬ 
structions for the study, the value of free rent was to represent 
the difference between the amount the agency under its standards 
would allow for rent and the amount included in the assistance 
plan for upkeep, taxes, or installment payments on property. If 
these expenses equalled or exceeded the amount the agency would 
have included for rent, home ownership would not actually consti¬ 
tute income in kind. Inhere such costs were included in the budget, 
the proportion of cases with "other provision” for shelter was 
reduced substantially. In Massachusetts, for example, only 0.9 
percent of the cases had "other provision” for shelter, though 
a special study made in 1941 showed that 21 percent of the 


- 31 - 



recipients in the State owned their own homes* 11 / The proportion 
of cases with shelter in kind not provided by relatives in 1944 
ranged from 0.9 percent in Massachusetts to 40 percent in Oklahoma 
and 50 percent in New Mexico. In half the States, however, the 
proportions varied within a very narrow range—from 2.4 percent 
in Rhode Island to 5.7 in Kansas. 

The extremely high incidence of home ownership indicated by 
the data for Nev; Mexico and Oklahoma cannot be explained fully from 
the information available. In almost one-fourth of the cases in 
New Mexico, persons other than the recipient or spouse were included 
in the assistance group. With the inclusion of additional persons 
in a case, there is greater likelihood that shelter will be avail¬ 
able through home ownership. However, in Virginia and West Virginia, 
where requirements and resources of other persons were included in 
the budget in 20-25 percent of the assistance cases, the proportion 
of cases witli other provivsion for shelter was much less than in 
New Mexico. In Oklahoma, budgeting on a fajuily basis did not 
occur to the same extent as in New Mexico, Virginia, West Virginia, 
or several other States, and requirements and resources of other 
persons were included in the budgets of only 6 percent of the cases. 
However, the tentative conclusion that an unusually large number 
of recipients in Oklahoma owned their homes is supported by a re¬ 
port of the St^ite agency that shows that 3^ percent of the recipi¬ 
ents of the three special types of public assistance in selected 
counties in 1945 lived in homes that they owned.12/ 

In California, where the agency collected information on 
home ownership in November 1944 , 20 percent of the recipients owned 
their homes. Tlie relatively high level of assistence in this State 
probably accounts, in part, for the opportunity to maintain home 
ownership. 13 / 


11 / Special report of the Coim.dssioner of Public Welfare concern¬ 
ing an investigation and study of the administration of the 
old-age assistance law, December 1942 , p. 56 . ^ 

12 / Unpublished report of the Oklahoma State Department of Public 
Welfare. 

13 / "Income and Living Arrangements of Old Age Security Recipients," 
Public Assistance in California . January-December 1944 , p. 4 . 


- 32 - 







Cases to Which Relatives Contributed Income in Kind 


, The following tab\LLation shows the States arrayed by the 
percent of cases that received income in kind from relatives: 

I 


Percent of cases Percent of cases 

with income in with income in 

kind contributed kind contributed 


State 

by relatives 

State 

by relatives 

Total, 20 States 

North Carolina.. 

18.3 

60.1 

Rhode Island... 

21.7 

Mississippi. 

52.4 

Kansas.. 

18.8 

Virginia. 

49.5 

New Hampshire.. 

18.4 

Vermont. 

40.6 

Minnesota. 

17.9 

Tennessee. 

30.0 

Diet, of Col... 

14.5 

Maine. 

28.4 

24 .5 

Illinoip * * > ^ T ^, 

13.0 

11.2 

New Mexico. 

Missouri. 

Oklahoma. 

23.7 

West Virginia.. 

7.2 

North Dakota.... 

23.1 

Massachusetts.. 

6.7 

Michigan. 

22.2 

California...:. 

5.6 


The extremely wide range obviously reflects, in part, differences in 
policies or practices with regard to the responsibility of relatives 
for support of the aged. 

Value of Income in Kind 


The value of income in kind can be computed for only the 7 
States that included the money value of such income in the budget 
for all, or practically all, cases that had income in kind. Table 14 
presents these data for recipient-only cases and for those that in¬ 
cluded the recipient and spouse. 

Since income in kind is unadaptable to more than one use, the 
freedom that individuals have for making a choice of purchases and 
for managing their own lives depends to a considerable extent on the 
amount of cash income available to them. In California and Massa¬ 
chusetts, income in kind represented a very small part of total in¬ 
come and recipients had substantial amounts of cash income. In 
North Cairolina, on the other hand, where average income was low. 


- 33 - 























Table 14.—Average total income, including estimated value of income 
in kind, by type of case, in 7 States in a month in 1944 


State 

Recipient-only cases 

, Recipient-and- 

-spouse cases 

Average 

total 

income 

Average 

total 

cash 

income 

Estimated aver¬ 
age value of 
income in kind 

Average 

total 

income 

Average 

total 

cash 

income 

Estiiriated aver¬ 
age value of 
income in kind 

Amount 

Percent 
of total 

Amount 

Percent 
of total 

Calif. 

$52.04 

$50.59 

$1.45 

2.8 

... 


... 


Mass. 

46.68 

45.81 

.87 

1.9 

$75.79 

$74.32 

$1.47 

1.9 

Mo. 

29. CO 

27.03 

1.97 

6.8 

50.83 

43.84 

6.99 

13.8 

N. Mex. 

31.38 

27.30 

4.08 

13.0 

51.06 

43.19 

7.87 

15.4 

N. C. 

20.56 

12.62 

7.94 

38.6 

32.14 

22.38 

9.76 

30.4 

N. Dek. 

38.48 

35.48 

3.00 

7.8 

62.46 

53.51 

3.95 

6.3 

W. Va. 

15.60 

15.25 

.35 

2.2 

24.19 

22.00 

2.19 

9.1 


1 

the value of income in kind represented about 39 percent of the 
total income for recipient-only cases. Average cash income amounted 
to $12.60 per month, or about 40 cents per day per recipient. Since 
this figure is an average, some recipients had less than this amount. 

In Massachusetts and California, the average recipient in recipient- 
only cases had cash income of more than |1.50 per day. 

Although 14 States do not have definite information on the 
value of income in kind, some conclusions may be drawn from data 
that are available. In most of the States where both assistance 
payments and total incomes of recipients were low, a large propor¬ 
tion of the recipients had income in kind. Since the value of this 
income was frequently estimated to be $5 or more, it obviously repre¬ 
sented a substantial portion of total income. Tnere were notable 
exceptions, however. In West Virginia, for ex;unple, less than one- 
third of the cases had income in kind, and this income was valued 
at $5 or more in only one-sixth of all cases. Therefore, though the 
average income of old-age assistance cases in the State was low, it 
must have consisted largely of cash. Table 15 shows the proportion 
of cases having income in kind with an estimated value of less than 
$5, and of |5 or more, and provides a basis for estimating roughly 
the relative importance of cash and kind income to recipients in 
each State. 


- 34 - 




















Table I5.--Percentage distribution of cases with income in kind and 
estimated value of such income, for 20 States in a month in 19^i4- 


State 

All 

cases 

No 

income 
in kind 

Income in kind 

All 

cases 

Estimated value 

Less 

than 

$5 

$5 or 
more 

Total 1/. 

100.0 

61.6 

38.4 

12.9 

25.5 

North Carolina. 

100.0 

16.3 

83.7 

13.2 

• 70.5 

Mississippi. 

100.0 

17.0 

83.0 

30.8 

52.2 

New Mexico. 

100.0 

23.0 

77.0 

26.6 

50.5 

Virginia. 

100.0 

26.h 

73.6 

17.0 

56.6 

Oklahoma. 

100.0 

3^.2 

65.8 

7.5 

58.3 

Tennessee. 

100.0 

i^l.7 

58.3 

31.2 

27.2 

Missouri. 

100.0 

1^7.0 

53.0 

22.9 

30.1 

Vermont. 

100.0 

1^8.0 

52.0 

7.2 

44.7 

North Dakota. 

100.0 

58.2 

41.8 

12.8 

29.0 

Kansas. 

100.0 

61.7 

38.3 

14.3 

24.0 

Maine. 

100.0 

62.7 

37.3 

5.7 

31.6 

Michigan. 

100.0 

68.2 

31.8 

8.1 

23.7 

West Virginia. 

100.0 

68.7 

31.3 

15.2 

16.1 

Minnesota. 

100.0 

70.0 

30.0 

11.2 

18.8 

California. 

100.0 

73.1 

26.9 

17.5 

9.4 

Rhode Island. 

100.0 

7^.3 

25.7 

4.S 

21.4 

New Hampshire. 

100.0 

75.1 

24.9 

6.8 

18.0 

Illinois. 

100.0 

80.0 

20.0 

5.3 

14.7 

District of Columbia.... 

100.0 

82.4 

17.6 

4.0 

13.6 

Massachusetts. 

100.0 

91.0 

9.0 

1.0 

8.0 


1/ Excludes Montana, for which comparable data are not available. 


- 35 - 

































TOTAL INCOME INCLUDING THE VALUE OF INCOME IN KIND 


Total income available to recipients includes assistance pay¬ 
ments, cash income from earnings or other sources, and the value of 
income in kind. An exact money value was not placed on income in 
kind for each case with such income, but for etich such case States 
were able to estimate whether the value amounted to more or less 
than $ 5 * In computing average income, cases with income in kind 
valued at $5 or more, but on which no exact money value had been 
placed by the agency, were excluded. Cases with income in kind 
valued at less than $5 were included. However, the average value 
of such income per assistance case was negligible since both the 
estimated value of the income and the proportion of cases with such 
income were small. 

The study supports the conclusion that differences in fiscal 
capacities of the States are the greatest single cause of differences 
in levels of assistance. Vdien total income of assistance cases is 
considered, the low averages generally occur in States with low per 
capita income. Table 16 shows the States ranked (l) by average in¬ 
come of cases consisting of recipient only and of recipient and 
spouse and ( 2 ) by per capita income in 1944 * 

The average amoiants of total income in the States ranged from 
$52.04 to $15.58 for recipient-only cases end from $ 75.79 to $ 24.19 
for cases that included the recipient and spouse (table I6). In 
other words, on the average, assistance cases in the State with the 
highest per capita income had three times as much to live on as those 
in the State with the lowest per capita income. The six States with 
the lowest per capita incomes had the lowest average amounts of total 
income available to recipients. 

Factors contributing to the wide range among the States in 
average amounts of total income are the same as those discussed 
previously under differences in amounts of requirements, assistance 
payments, and total cash incomes. The added factor is the differ¬ 
ence in the value of income in kind. Because the amount of income 
in kind was relatively large in some States, the ranking of States 
by average income differs somewhat from the ranking ty amo\mt of 
cash income. 

For a number of reasons, the State variations in the average 
amount of total income of assistance cases cannot be considered as 
representing absolute differences in what recipients have to live 
on. The extent to which the cost of medical care is included in 
determining the amount of assistance payments affects the averages. 

As already indicated, there is great diversity in State methods of 
meeting the cost of medical care for recipients. In some States, 


- 36 - 





Table l6.--Average Income of cases for which total income was reported, 
by type of case in a month in 19 ^> and State rank in average 
per capita income for 19^4 



Recipient only l/ 

Recipient and spouse 2/ 

State 

Average 

income 

State rank 
in average 
income 

State rank 
in 

per capita 
income, 

1944 

Average 

income 

State rank 
in average 
income 

State rank 
in 

per capita 
income, 

1944 

Total. 

$37.17 

--- 


$38.02 


— 

jlifomia. 

52.04 

1 

1 


— 

— 

tssachusetts. 

46.68 

2 

5 

75.79 

1 

1 

bode Island. 

38.81 

3 

6 

65.01 

2 

2 

prth Dakota. 

38.48 

4 

10 

62.46 

3 

6 

Dntana.. 

37.25 

5 

7 

59.10 

4 

3 

^strict of Columbia. 

35.30 

6 

4 

— 

— 

--- 

ichigan. 

34 . 0 ? 

7 

3 

— 

— 

--- 

llinois. 

33.67 

8 

2 

— 

— 

— 

aine. 

33.28 

9 

9 

53.29 

5 

5 

Innesota. 

32.64 

10 

13 

--- 



ew Mexico. 

31.38 

11 

19 

51.06 

7 

14 

few Hampshire. 

30.87 

12 

14 

51.84 

6 

9 

femont. 

30.78 

13 

12 

46.82 

9 - 

8 

ansas. 

30.10 

14 

8 

44.15 

10 

4 

Ussouri. 

29.00 

15 

11 

50.83 

8 

7 

Idahoma. 

28.59 

16 

16 

41.76 

11 

11 

'irginia. 

21.01 

17 

15 

38.05 

12 

10 

brth Carolina. 

20.56 

18 

20 

32.14 

14 

15 

jlssissippi. 

18.69 

19 

21 

32.33 

13 

16 

bet Virginia. 

15.60 

20 

17 

24.19 

16 

12 

bnnessee. 

15.58 

21 

18 

25.37 

15 

13 


./ 21 States. 

1/ 16 States; excludes 5 States that made separate budgets for each eligible individual. 




































relatively large medical bills, including the cost of hospital care j 
during acute illnesses, may be met through the money payment to the 
recipient. In other States, amounts included for medical care may | 

be small and intended to enable the recipient to pay for an occasional 
visit to the doctor or for drugs in case of chronic disability. The 
agency may meet the cost of additional medical care through payments . 
to vendors from general assistance or other funds, or free care may 
be provided in public hospitals. The cost of care met through these 
sources is not reflected in the total income of recipients. In ti^o ' 

of the States included in the study, practically all the income of 
recipients was available to meet maintenance needs. In West Virginia, 
the agency met the cost of medical care by payments to vendors from 
general assist^uice funds. In the District of Columbia, medical care 
was provided largely by public hospitals and other community agencies. 

Although the inclusion of amounts for medical care tends to 
raise the average payments and average incomes of cases, it does not 
necessarily result in high averages. For example, amounts ranging 
from $3 to |9 to meet medical bills were included in the budgets of 
more th^ two-fifths of the cases in one State. Yet assistance pay¬ 
ments were extremely low because the agency was unable to meet the 
budget deficits in full. ' 

Practices with respect to evaluation of cash income and of 
income in kind also significantly affect the average total income 
of cases. State agencies have placed increasing emphasis in policy 
materials on the fact that resources considered in determining need 
should be actually available to recipients and should be received 
with regularity. As has already been pointed out, however, it is 
evident that in 1944 policy or practice in evaluating income differed 
very substantially among the States. HI 

Average income for recipient-only cases in the States that 
prepare a separate budget for each recipient would have been some- 
what higher if data for cases in which two or more persons in a 
family received old-age assistance had been excluded before the 
averages were computed. 

Although the factors discussed above affect the ranking of 
States by average amount of total income of old-age assistance cases, 
it is evident that, even if State practices had been more nearly 
uniform, the States that rank high would still be in the top portion 
of the scale, though possibly in different order. Similarly, the j 

other States would change ranx only within a. limited area on the ,1 

scale. The \ride range among the States in the amounts recipients 
had to live on would not be substantially less than is revealed by » 

the data presented here. Significant narrowing of the range could 
be achieved only by the adoption of more nearly uniform standards 
for requirements and policies for considering resources, coupled 
with sufficient funds to meet need ^ full. 


- 38 - 




Table 1?.—Percentage distribution of recipient-only cases by specified amount 
of total income, for 21 States in a month in 19^4 l/ 


Q 


<0 

CVJ 

CM 

1 


CM CM 

rH 

1 1 


, 

1 

H VO 

1 4- 

1 

b— 1 

1 

I 

o 



• 

• 

1 


• • 

• • 

1 1 

• 

1 

1 

• 

• 

1 • 

1 

• 1 

1 

iH 

O 

o 

o 


1 

CMl 


CMl 

1 1 


1 

1 


rH 

1 

1 

1 



a 

















ON 



















On 


OJ 

CM 

1 


1 CM 

VO CM 

1 iH 

-4 

1 

1 

1 

rH 

1 CM 

1 

iTN 1 

1 


1 


♦ 

• 

1 


1 • 

• ^****>N. • 

1 ♦ 

• 

1 

• 

1 

« 

1 • 

1 

1 

• 1 

1 

1 

1 


O 


o 


1 

CM| 


CMl 

I 


1 

1 

1 


1 


ON 



















-<e- 



















ON 



















00 


CO 


1 


1 iTN 

rH 

1 iH 

CM 

1 

1 

1 

CO 

1 1 

1 

CM 1 

1 


1 


• 

• 

1 


1 • 

• • 

1 • 

• 

1 

1 

1 

• 

1 1 

1 

• 1 

1 

1 


o 


o 


1 

CM| 

1 

H CM| 

1 


1 

1 

1 


1 1 

1 

1 


CO 



















■ce- 



















On 













VO 






I>- 


VO 

CO 

1 

iH 

CM 

ro CM 1 

1 iH 


1 

CM 

1 

1 1 

1 

1 

1 


1 


• 

• 

1 

• 

• • 

• ♦ 1 

1 

• 

1 

• 

1 

• 

1 1 

1 

• 1 

1 

1 


O 


o 

iH 

1 



CM 1 

1 


1 


1 


1 1 

1 





















-ce- 



















ON 

VO 


OJ 

CM 

CO rH 

iTN rH 

ON H 

1 00 

VO 

1 

O 

1 

IfN 

rH On 

1 

VO CM 



1 


• 

• 

• 

• 

• • 

• • • 

1 

• 


• 

1 

» 

• • 

« 

• • 

1 


o 


OJ 

iTN rH 


iH 

VO 

1 

iH 

1 

fH 

1 

rH 


1 

H 

i 


VD 



















•ce- 



















ON 

ITN 


CO 

IfN ir\ CO CM 00 

CO -:d- -=f 

O VO 

CM 

CM 

<3N 

VO CM 

1 

1 

IfN CM 

1 

1 

1 


CO 


lOv 

CM 

lO 


CM H 

CM CM 

rH 

CO rH 

CO 


CM 

VO 

CM 


iTN 


OJ 

(ON 




CM 












-ce- 



















CJN 


o 

1 

o 

CM 

Q\ ITN 

CO rH ITN CO ITN 

COCO 

rH 

ITNVO 

-4 -4 00 

rH VO 

CM 


1 

o 


ir\ 

1 

f 

c>>oo 

<D CM 

CJN CO <VN 


CO CM 

o 


O 

CO 


r-i 

rH 




iH 

#H 

CM 

H CM 

CO CM CM 


CM 

iH 

iH 


CM 

4 
























ON 

m 


.VO 

1 

iTN iH 

O IfNOO 

CO CM 

t— t^-4 

IfN 

O CO 

CM 00 

ON 


1 


• 

1 

1 











4 4 





o 


ITN 

O 

CO rH CO 

IfN CO C 

CO CM 

CTN COOO -4 

t-- 

fH 

O 00 

CO 


CO 


CM 


VO 

CO CO 

CM -=}■ -=^ 

-d" 

ITN-4 

m 


IfN 

CO CO 


4 



-fe- 



















<0N 

C\J 


H 

1 

iH 

CM -4- ir\ 

C—-=»■ VO 

C^-d- 

t-- CO CM -4 

ON 

CM 4 4 

CO VO 

CM 


1 

o 



1 

1 

CC| c- N-CO 

00 CM 

H CM 

O VO VO 

CJn-4 

O rH 4 

On h- CJN 


CM 


CM 

fH 

CM CM 

CM CO CO_:i- 

iH 

CO-4 -4 

iH 

IfN rH 

iH 

C04 



-«/?- 



















CJN 

iH 


t-- 

1 

VO 

O 

CM 0- 

1 CO CM 

CTn H 

H 

ITN O 

rH 

1 

1 

t--1-- O 

H VO 

t— 


1 



1 

1 

« 

• 

• • 

1 • • 

• • 

• 

• 

• 

• 






o 


00 


fH 

t— ITN 

1 H CM 

COCO 


IfN rH -4 

1 

t— CM 

CM 

On VO 


r^ 






VO 




-4 



00 

CO ' 


-ce- 


















00 

CO 

s 

o 

CM 

1 

1 

1 

1 1 

1 1 1 

-4- 1 

1 

1 

1 

o 

1 

rH 1 

CM 

CM 00 

O 

® 

A H 
-P 

• 

O 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 1 

1 1 

1 1 1 

1 1 1 

• 1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

• 

•H 

1 

1 

1 

• 

rH 

• • 

iH 

ON 




• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

03 

• 

• 

• 

• • 

• • 

• • 

• • • 

• • ♦ 

• • • 

• • 

• • 

• • 

• 

• 

• 

# 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 


• 

• 

• 

• • 

• • 

• • 


« • 

• • 

• • 

• 

• 

• 




# 

• 

•H 

• 

• • 

• • • 

• • 

• 

• 

• 





• ♦ 

• 




• 

• 

• 


• 

• 

• • 

• • 

# • • 

• • • 

• • 

• • 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 


• 

• « 


• • 

• • 

• 

• 


State 


• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

rH 

O 

O 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• • 

• • 

• • 

• • 

• • 

• • • 

• • • 

00 • • 

• • 

• • 

• • 

• • 

• • 

• • 

• 

« 

• 

• 

• 

• 

® 

U 

• 

• 

• 

• 

od 

33 

•H 

• 

• 

• 

03 

• • 

• • 

• • 

• *03 


• • 

• • 

• • 

• • 

• 

• 

03 

•H 



• 

♦ 

• 

05 

O 

• 

• 

• 

♦ « 

• • 

• • 

H-> • • 

® • • 

00 • 03 

•H • 

^ • 

• 

• 

• 

•H 

43 

ro 

• 

o 

o 

H 

O 

P 

■P 

O 

■a 

: 9 

• iH 

® 

• « 

• • 

• a5 

(3 

•H 

bO 






•P 

m 

• • 


*rH *rH 

• 

03 

ft -H 

03 

00 

® 

P 





o 

•H 

• • 

43 3 o 

00 h 



O 

p 

'a M 

ro 

■P -H 

•H 




Q 

o 

(h 

•H 

§ 

00 • 

(d ® 

o bO (0 
03 -H ® 

ro 3 
•H O 

§ 

3 

w 


43 

43 

o 

ro 

® 

§s 

> 




EH 

•H 

■P 

CO 

•H 

00 cl 
fl •H 

CO 43 S 
to u n 

ro ro 
ro m 

a 

> 

> 

-P 

+3 

05 'Ci 
H O 

§ g ffa 





Oi 

o 

•H 


ffj ff} 

(d "H *H 

•H “H 

o 

® 

<D 

O 

O 

M 43 

<D 

® vH 

<D 





p 

M 

M S 

S X X 

X X 

X 

tz; 




o pa 



- 39 - 


l/ Excludes cases for which total income was not known. 
2/ Less than 0.05 percent. 
















































Table 18.--Percentage distribution of recipient-and-spouse cases by specified amount of 

total income, for l6 States in a month in 19^4 l/ 


o 


0 












o 

U 

u 

IfN 

-4- 00 

on 

1 

O 1 IPx 

1 On 

« o 

1 

» 

1 1 

iH 

o 

o 

• 

• 

• 

• 

1 • 

• 1 • 

1 

1 • 

1 

1 

1 1 

-«e- 


6 

o 



on 

1 

rH 1 

1 rH 

1 rH 

! 

f 

1 1 


On 









I o 





On 


t-- 

1 

lOx 

'O' 

1 ON 

O 1 I 

1 On 

1 

1 

1 1 




• 

1 

• 

• 

1 • 

• 1 1 

1 ♦ 

1 

! 

t 

1 1 


O 


o 

1 


-4- 

1 

rH 1 t 

1 H 

1 OJ 

1 

1 

( 1 


On 














-ce- 














ON 

00 


CO 

^ VO 


1 on 

OJ o 

1 on 

1 o 

1 

! 

1 1 


1 


• 

« 

• 

• 

1 • 

• • • 

1 • 

I • 

1 

1 

I 1 


o 


OJ 


on OJ 

1 OJ 

on on OJ 

1 on 

I On 

r 

1 

1 1 


CO 





a' 























On 


On 


iTN H .4- 00 

VO ITx OJ 

~=t- O 

1 

o 

CVI 1 




• 

• 

• 

• 

• • 

• • • 

• • 

• • 

! 

• 

• 1 


O 


ITN 

OJ 

ON O 


CO OJ OJ 

on 

OJ a. 

1 

VC 

OJ I 


r- 




-ij- 



rH 

H 



















On 

VO 


O 

on On ON On 00 

ON O 00 

O -d- 

OJ O 

OJ 

o 

OJ 1 


1 


• 

• 

• 

• 

• • 

• • • 

• • 

• • 

« 

• 

• » 


o 


ON 


ITN VO 

iH 

O ITN h- rH -4- 

H ITN 


VC 

OJ 1 


VO 




rH 

OJ 

•H 

on rH 

on 

on 





■te- 














On 

ir\ 


on 

CO 

ON OJ 

on OJ 

t-- ^ 00 

LfNVO 

on o 

O! VO » 


1 


• 

• 

• 

• 

• • 

• • • 

• • 

• • 

• 

• 

» f 


o 


-:J- 

on m H 

(H O 

CO t- ITN on ON 

ITn OJ 


VC CO 1 


ITN 


iH 

fH 

OJ 


OJ 

on on on 

on 

OJ 


rH 



-ee- 














On 

-d- 



iH 

rH 

OJ CO -:t 

VD -:d- O 

u'n t- 

H O 

iH 

t-- 

aN-:d- 




• 

• 

• 

• 

• • 

• • • 

• • 

• • 

• 

• 

• • 


O 


VO 


on H 

O, ON 

L''N OJ On rH 

C--00 

rH VO 

o 




OJ 


on 


on 

H OJ 

H 



On on 


-m- 














On 

on 


on 

On 

1 

rH O 

C r- im H ON 

ITN O 

c ^ 

ON-^ 


O 


d 

on On 

[ 

VO iTN 

rH OJ -4- 

0^1 on ON on _:J- CM 


on 


OJ 

on 



irx rH 

rH 

.4- 

rH ' 

rH 

rH 

on rH 
















ax 














OJ 


o 

00 CO 

1 

O rH 

rH 1 

ON 1 

VD O 


ON on rH 


1 


• 

• 

• 

1 

• • 

• • 1 

• 1 






o 


CO 



1 

ITN 

iH 1 

on 1 

rH 

o 

rH 

t—CO 


OJ 


iH 




m 


on 




rH 















a: 

q 













00 


o 

iH 

1 

on 

1 

~=i- 1 

1 1 1 

OJ 1 

1 1 

ON 


on oi 

o 


OJ 

• 

1 

• 

1 

• 1 

1 1 1 

• 1 

1 1 

• 


• • 


-ee- 

CV' 

1 


1 

1 

1 1 1 

ITN 1 

1 1 

00 


-d- (On 


0) 


• 

♦ 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

» 

• 

• 

• 

• • 

• • 

• • 

• « 

• • 

• • 

• • 

• • 

• • 

• • • 

* • * 

• • • 

• • • 

• • • 

• • • 

• • • 

• • • 

• • • 

• • 

• • 

• • 

• • 

• • 

• • 

• • 

• • 

0 • 

• • 

• • 

• • 

« • 

♦ • 

• • 

• • 

« • 

• • 

• 

• 

♦ 

♦ 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 


' • • 

• • 

• • 

• • 

• • 

• • 

• 

• • 

• • 




• 

• 

• 

CO 

• • 

» <D t 

Pi • 

• • 

• 


• cd 


cd 



• 

• 

■p 

• • 

• • 

•H 0 

• 



• •H 


+3 


evil 

• 

• 

-p 

•H • 

• •H • 

rH -P 

• B 

• 


* Pi 


ca 


• 

• 

0 

p< • 

• xi o 

o o 

* 0 

« 


« 




rH 

• 

• 

m 

ft • 

• 0 O 


♦ rH 

0 


• tiO 




cti 

• 


P 

•H •H 

• ft hH 

0 0 

0 


0 Pi 




-p 

• 

• 

x: 

0 ^ 

0 fi « 

O ft 

a M 

0 

-p 

•H •H 




O 

m 

# 

o 

CO p 

C 0 0 

o 

0 

Pi 





Eh 

cd 

0 

0 

•H O 

0 w s 

,C1 XI 

^ 0 

0 

o 





m 

a 

•iH 

CD 

CD 

m CO 

CD CO 

•p 

Pi > 

■p -p 

Pi Pi 

0 '0 
r-j O 

§ g 

bO -P 

Pi 0 





W 


0 

•H •H 

O 0 0 

O O 

^ Xi 

(1) 

0 

•H 0 





s 

S 

S 2 

s & s 

S #2; 

O ft 

Eh 

> 

> 


HIOJI 



Excludes cases for which total income was not known. 

Excludes 5 States that made separate budgets for each eligible individual 





































A distribution of cases by amount of total income tiiro?/s 
additional light on variations among the States in total income 
available to old-age assistance cases. In addition, it reflects 
the variations in the total income of recipients within each State. 
The distribution for recipient-only cases by amoimt of total income 
is shown in table 17 , and for cases that included the recipient and 
spouse, in table 18 . 

Because the California law provided a minimum below which 
total income may not fall and sufficient funds were made available 
to carry out the intent of the law, each recipient had at least $ 50 . 
Recipients vd.th more than |50 income are those with income from earn¬ 
ings or other sources whose requirements, determined on a budgetary 
basis, exceeded $ 50 . Massachusetts, which has a minimura for assist¬ 
ance plus other income, shows a wider distribution of cases by amount 
of income, because the minimum varies according to the recipient’s 
living arrangements. Three-fourths of the recipient-only cases in 
Massachusetts had incomes of $40 or more. Those falling below that 
amount were recipient-only cases living in family groups, or husband 
and wife living together for each of whom income was determined 
separately. In Rhode Island, one-half of the recipients had total 
incomes of $40 or more. In contrast with these States, two States 
reported that four-fifths of the recipients in recipient-only cases 
had total incomes of less than $ 20 ; in Mississippi, approximately 
two-thirds of the recipients had less than this amount. In two 
additional States, more than two-fifths of the recipients had less 
than $ 20 . In the remaining States the majority of the recipients 
had from $20 to $40. 


- 41 - 






V. APPENDIX 


SAMPLES ON THE DATA ARE BASED 


Data for 20 of the 21 States were recorded for a sample of 
recipients selected by random sampling methods. In introducing 
plans for the study, the Bureau of Public Assistance recommended 
to State agencies that the sample include at least 1,000 recipients. 

A larger sample, not to exceed 5 , 000 , was suggested lor States with 
relatively large case loads. The proportion of the recipients in¬ 
cluded in the sample, the actual size of the sample in each State, 
and the month to which the data relate are shown in table 19 . 

Because of budgetary practices in some States, it was nec¬ 
essary to adjust the sample of "recipients" to obtain a sample of 
assistance "cases." For purposes of the study, an assistance group 
or "case" was defined to include those individuals whose personal 
requirements and resources were included in the budget. Cases were 
classified as recipient-only, recipient and spouse, and recipient 
and others, with or without spouse. 

In recipient-only cases, the requirements of one recipient 
were included in the budget, and the old-age assistance payment 
was intended to meet the needs of this recipient only. For recip- 
ient-and-spouse cases, tlie requirements of botli husband and wife 
were included in the budget. The spouse may have been eligible 
for assistance or may have been included as essential to the well¬ 
being of the recipient. Similarly, the cases that included the 
recipient and others, with or without spouse, might include one 
or more other persons eligible for old-age assistance. 

Whether separate payments were made to individuals in cases 
that included two or more persons depended on two factors—the 
eligibility of each individual in the case and agency practice. 

If only one individual was eligible for old-age assistance, one pay¬ 
ment was made to the case. If the case included two or more eligible 
individuals, the number of old-age assistance payments made to the 
case depended on the practice in the particular State. In some States 
the usual practice was to make a separate payment to each eligible 
individual. In a number of States, however, the needs of two or more 
eligible individuals were usually met through one assistance payment. 

Since the original sample w^as based on recipients, "cases" 
that included two or more recipients had more chance of being drawn 
in the sajaple than cases that included only one recipient. To cor¬ 
rect the sample for the overrepresentation of cases that included 


- 42 - 



two or more recipients, one-half 
selected on a random basis, were 
sample of ”cases," therefore, is 
cipients in States that followed 
more old-age assistance payments 
Financial data presented in this 
recipients. 


the schedules for such cases, 
eliminated. 14 / The resulting 
smaller than the sample of re- 
the practice of basing two or 
on a single budget (table 19 ). 
report are for cases rather than 




14/ Since the number of cases in which more than two payments were 
based on a single budget vTas negligible, no further adjustment 
was made for these cases. 


- 43 - 





Table 19.--Size of sample and month in 19^4 to which data 


<D 

On -p 

H ^ o! 

O iH 
CJ (D 
•H ^ J., 

> 

XS cC 
-P O -P 
C +> (d 
O •xi 
S 


u 






P 

0 






0 

p 


P 

P 



P 

B 


0 

0 



P 

0 


P 

P 

0 

0 

> 

0 


bO 

P 

&) 

P 



> 

0 



< 

<: 



p:; 


>5 


-P 

CO 


< 


U 

pH 

< 


0 ) 

•i 

>> -p 
rH P< 

P 0 ) . 

ca h) 


t>^ 

'3 



p 

u 


0 

0 

0) 

p 

p 

,9 



a 

0 


0 

p 

tn >> >> p 


> 

o 


<D 

ca 


^ pi 
•-0 i-a 


I 


>> 
Ph fH 
<D P 
CO ^ 


0 

-p 

0 ^ 

H 

0 

U 


0 

0 

0 

c3 

O 


0 

-P 

P 

0 

•H 

P^ 

•H 

O 

0 

« 


■s 

On 

00 


O m L'^ LTN L^N 
O OO OJ OJ VJD 
OJ C-- On^ <M 

•s •v ^ n 

oj c— m 

LTN CVl OJ rH 

iH iH 


O O O O m 
C\joocOCC'- 4 - 
- 4 - ITN OO OJ 00 

•v ^ ^ •s 

H irwo VC MD 

r— 00 ir\ oj CO 


00 00 O O VO 

8 H 10.00 on 

CM no LTx 

•s •s 

o ir\ iTN m 

iH ro 


iTN on o on CM o 

CM (On t-- ltn 

CM CJnVD 00 -4 

•\ •v •v ^ •v 

VO c^-:t ITNCC 

cn H iH 


OJ 

-4- 

CVJ 

m 

o 

<?\ 


8 00 ir\ m o 

roc\JC^- 4 - 

OJ t-- On OJ H 

•V •s •v ^ Vv 

ai ir\ CO itn 
IfV CM CM rH 
cH iH 


O O O O CM 
VD 00 OC' 00 -4 
4- LTn on CM CO 


•\ •v 


•N 


VO ITS VO VO CM 
CO L'^ CM O 

iH 


VO -4 ITN C CO 
CM 00 4 CO VO 
ononmonr— 

•S •v 

H VO ir\cr) CO 

•H on 


ir\ o o CM o 

CM o ir\ CM ir\ 
O CTn CM CO 4 

•V •v ^ ^ ^ •s 

VD IfN iTNOO 

CO H rH 


0 ? 

rH 

Ph 


0 

P 


u 

0 

rP 


0 

0 

0 

o3 

O 


0 

-P 

P 

0 

•H 

Ph 

•H 

O 

0 

K 


on 

ITN 


iH 

4 

■sR 


o r-i r— on 
4 H on On LTn 
CM CT\ O O VO 

•v 

ir\ LTN iH CM 


H ON 4 00 
rH fH on 
lA CM CO on VO 


•s •«» •> 

on 4 CM 


•V •v 

^ CM 


CO on o ON CM 
O tr\ ITN VC 4 
O CT\ O VO (On 

•\ •v •x 

O iH rH 


On (On O LA CM O 
VA CTn onoo (On on 
O CO lACO On CM 

on 


CM 


•N 

rH 


O rH rH CO 
4 rH on on CM 
CM CJN O rH O 

•V •s 

ITN LTn H on 


on On ON -d- 
CVJ C— iH rH CV' 
QD CM 00 on rH 

•V •v 

on 4 CM rH on 


VO 4 ON (On VO 
CM VO VO VO (On 
on o O VO O 

•v 

rH rH iH rH rH 


ON Q O O CM O 
VO O on (On ON on 
O O LA (ON On CM 

•v •V 

on rH CM rH 



O UA (A 
on on CM CM tA 


rH rH rH rH rH 


o o c o on 

CO CM CM CM on 


rH rH rH rH rH 


o 

iH VO lA CM CO 

^ rH rH rH rH 


LA lA VO lA 
lA rH rH 

rH rH rH rH rH iH 


0 

03 

■P 

CO 


0^ 

•H 

A 


H 

C 

o 


rH 

cd 

-p 

o 

Eh 


cd O 


e p 0 

O -H 

O -H O 0 

<P P P Cd 0 

•H p tH 0 p 

rH © iH P -H 

Oj •H rH S Cd 

O P M M S 





0 • 

p 

• 

• 

• 

• • • 

cd 


p 

p 

♦ 

Ti 

• • • 

•H 

•H • 

rH 

4^ 

• 

p 

♦ • • 

P 

P 0 

0 

0 

• 

0 

• • • 

P 

0 0 

U 


• 

P 


W) 

P4 -H 

cd 


od 

0 

0 • P 

Jh 

S X 

0 

P 

a 

M 

0 p •H 

P 

B 0 



0 


® P P 

> 

m s 

P 

P 

A 

0 

0 0 



p 

P 

0 

T3 

p i 

4-^ 

> > 

u 

u 

H 

0 

P P ^ 

0 

0 0 

0 

0 


P 

0 0 P 

0 

& 

& 


0 

s 

Eh > > 

> 


- 44 - 


U. S GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 0-1948 


ij Approximate figures; actual proportion for Missouri was 1/32.92; for Vermont, I/ 5 . 28 . 

























































"ils 27 


THE APPLICATION PROCESS 
IN 

PUBLIC ASSISTANCE ADMINISTRATION 


PUBLIC ASSISTANCE REPORT NO. 14 


C 




FEDERAL SECURITY AGENCY 
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION 
Bureau of Public Assistance > 


Aii, 









&lh A/ £ 




V 


; Foreword_ ii 

Definitions_ 

Understanding the Application Process_ 

‘ Interviewing Applicants.__ 

: The Opportunity to Apply_ 

Safeguarding the Opportunity to Apply_ 7 

I Public Information, Office Facilities, and Staffing_ 8 

P Promptness and Efficiency in the Application Process_ 9 

’ Expediting the Application Process_ 9 

i' Controls_ 11 

• Determination of Initial Eligibility_ 11 

Exploring Eligibility_ 12 

The Decision___ 14 

Payments to Eligible Applicants_ 15 

Procedures Safeguarding an Applicant’s Rights_ 15 

Staff Development and the Application Process_j- 17 

L‘ Selected References- 19 

(I) 


|. 


M w CO 






















Foreword 


This statement on the application process in public assistance ad¬ 
ministration was developed in the Bureau of Public Assistance to meet 
the need for a policy statement in an area not adequately covered by 
previous Bureau materials or fully discussed in professional literature. 
The standards are based on the Bureau’s knowledge of State public 
assistance agency operations secured from State reports and continuous 
negotiations with State agency staffs. The Bureau acknowledges the 
contribution made to this statement by State agencies through use of 
their material and through comments made by State agency staffs on 
the draft statement. 

The Bureau's requirements for the operation of State plans under 
the Social Security Act as they relate to determination of initial eligi¬ 
bility and the application process are set forth here as minimum stand¬ 
ards. Each standard is interpreted and commented on, and recom¬ 
mendations are made concerning effective methods of establishing the 
standards in agency practice. From the standpoint of the client and of 
the agency, the application process in any program, public or private, 
family or child welfare, constitutes one of the most important areas 
of agency activity. These standards are offered for consideration by 
staff members of public and private agencies and by faculty and 
students of schools of social work in the hope that they mfiy con¬ 
tribute toward delineation and clarification of the principles involved 
in receiving and acting on applications in all fields of social case work. 
A significant contribution to professional practice can be made, par¬ 
ticularly by public welfare staffs, if their experiences in the prepara¬ 
tion of standards in relation to these proposals, and their discoveries 
in the use of such standards, are written down and made available for 
study and discussion. 

Jane M. Hoey, Director^ 

Bureau of Public Assistance. 


May 1, 1948 

(ii) 



THE APPLICATION PROCESS 


IN 

PUBLIC ASSISTANCE ADMINISTRATION 


The application process in public assistance administration is an 
important focus of agency operation because it is the means by which 
an individual asserts his claim to assistance. The application process 
encompasses all activity related to an application, from an individual’s 
first indication to the agency that he wishes to receive assistance or to 
have his eligibility considered to the receipt of payment or other dis¬ 
position of his application. The purpose of the application process, 
therefore, is to receive applications, to assist applicants in exploring 
eligibility for assistance, to determine initial eligibility or ineligibility, 
and to assure the issuance of initial payments to eligible persons. 

Democratic principles of equity require that eligibility for benefits 
in publicly supported programs be defined by law. State laws, there¬ 
fore, specify the eligibility requirements in effect in the public as¬ 
sistance programs. This specification removes from the discretion 
of the administration the right to exclude persons who come within 
the scope of the program. All persons meeting the eligibility qualifi¬ 
cations are equal before the law and have a right to receive assistance 
under a uniform application of the law. The right of eligible persons 
to receive assistance is also inherent in the requirements of the Social 
Security Act for the development and operation of State public as¬ 
sistance plans. Methods of administration necessary for proper and 
efficient operation of State plans under the Social Security Act ^ are 
interpreted to include standards and procedures that protect this right 
for each individual by making the opportunity to apply for assistance 
freely available and by granting assistance promptly to each eligible 
individual. Also, under the Social Security Act, State agencies are 
responsible for establishing methods of administration that provide 
for a determination of eligibility or ineligibility on an equitable basis 
for each applicant and recipient. 

The State plan, as required under the Social Security Act,^ is con¬ 
sidered to be a means of achieving efficient administration of the public 

1 Social Security Act as amended, title I, sec. 2 (a) (5), title IV, sec. 402 (a) (5), and 
title X, sec. 1002 (a) (5). 

’ Ibid title I, sec. 1, title IV, sec. 401, and title X, sec. 1001. 

(1) 



2 


assistance programs. Therefore, ceilain minimum requirements forS 
State plans® have been established as essential to attaining efficiency| 
in determining eligibility and in carrying out the application process.)! 
In these activities the administration of public assistance agencies is| 
appraised not only by the provisions of the State plan but also by |j 
agency practice in carrying out the provisions. 

The five criteria that follow offer a means of evaluating the applica¬ 
tion process as it is carried on in public assistance agencies: , 


1. All persons desiring to receive assistance have an opportunity 
to apply to the agency administering assistance. 

2. All applications for assistance are given prompt and efficient 
consideration and action by the agency administering assist¬ 
ance. 

3. Eligibility or ineligibility to receive assistance is determined 
for each individual application. 

4. All applicants determined to be eligible receive an assistance 
payment. 

5. All activity of the agency in receiving and acting upon appli¬ 
cations is carried on in a manner that enables each individual 
to maintain his personal dignity and integrity. 


Carrying out the application process in accordance with these 
criteria depends largely on the establishment of State-v;ide policies 
and procedures that clearly define the methods of handling applica¬ 
tions and the job of each individual staff member in the total process— 
policies that make it possible for each agency worker to act on indi¬ 
vidual applications promptly and with confidence. Supervision is 
important in the entire process to assure the agency that staff members 
understand the principles on which policies are based, have knowledge 
of agency policies and procedures, and apply the policies appropri¬ 
ately in individual situations with confidence and dispatch. 

In using this document as a guide in working with applicants, 
agency workers are reminded that these standards and recommenda¬ 
tions do not supersede any State agency’s instructions to its staff. To 
the extent that social workers can apply these principles within the 
framework of agency standards and procedures, the proposals have 
validity for staff use. In instances in which agency standards and 
procedures may not have been as fully developed as recommended here, 
staff can apply these principles only within agency limitations. 


I 

If 


® The requirements for State plans under the Social Security Act are issued to State 
agencies administering public assistance under the act by the Bureau of Public Assistance, 
Social Security Administration, Federal Security Agency, in the Handbook of Public Assist¬ 
ance Administration. This handbook is not available for general distribution. 








3 


Definitions 

For clarity, certain words used repeatedly throughout this paper are 
defined as follows: 

An applicant is a person who has expressed to the agency adminis¬ 
tering public assistance a desire to receive assistance and whose appli¬ 
cation has not been terminated. For aid to dependent children, the 
relative with whom a child will live is the applicant in the child’s 
behalf.’ 

An application is an action by which an individual indicates his 
desire to receive assistance to the agency administering public assis¬ 
tance. Applications, which are construed to include reapplications, 
continue in effect until terminated. An individual may present his 
application through another person authorized to act in his behalf. 

Termination of an application is effected by one of the following 
actions: 

1. Written notification to the applicant that a payment in a 
stated amount has been authorized. 

2. Written notification to the applicant that his application is 
denied, including the reason for the denial. 

3. Notation in the individual or family record that the appli¬ 
cation has been disposed of because of death or inability to 
locate the applicant, or because the applicant has decided 
he does not want to pursue his application further. 

Understanding the Application Process 

Before an agency can develop satisfactory standards and procedures 
relating to the application process and before agency staff can carry 
them out in a manner that meets the criteria for evaluating agency 
action, each member of the staff should understand fully the purpose 
of the process, its essential elements or basic steps, and its meaning 
to both the applicant and the agency. The analysis of the applica¬ 
tion process presented here will, it is believed, help agencies to develop 
standards and procedures that provide for a better quality of service 
to applicants and for more efficient administration of the programs. 
The mere fact of analysis tends to make the application process ap¬ 
pear somewhat formidable and routine; in reality, however, it cannot 
be routine in nature nor is it usually complicated. On the contrary, 
the methods of handling applications need to be adustable to the 
varying circumstances of each individual applicant. 

The application process usually consists of three more or less clearly 
defined steps. 


4 


1. During the first step the applicant with the help of the worker 
tells the agency why he is applying and relates his circumstances in 
sufficient detail to substantiate his request for assistance. In the course 
of this discussion the worker informs the applicant about the assistance 
programs for which he may be eligible and the conditions of eligibility 
that must be established. The applicant needs to know what infor¬ 
mation is necessary to establish his eligibility and also the extent to 
which he is expected to participate in establishing his eligibility. He 
must, furthermore, know what help the agency is prepared to give him 
in establishing it. When, in addition, he has gained an understanding 
of the agency’s responsibility for carrying out the provisions of the 
law in accordance with its established standards and procedures he 
then is in a position both to assume his responsibilities and to protect ' 
his rights, particularly with respect to fair hearings and the jirotec- ■ 
tion of confidential data furnished or otherwise made available to the 
agency. 

On the basis of the information received or already known to the ' 
applicant, he decides whether or not he wishes to pursue his applica¬ 
tion further. If so, it is the agency’s responsibility to inform the appli¬ 
cant that he may be eligible for assistance under more than one pro¬ 
gram, and thereby enable him to decide for which type of assistance he •' 
wishes to apply. The applicant may need, depending on his previous i 
experience and knowledge of the programs and his intelligence and * 
emotional condition, varying amounts of help from the agency in i 
relating to his own particular circumstances what he knows or learns i 
about the agency and the programs. The decision to continue the ' 
application or to terminate it is the applicant’s and his alone. This ; 
fact does not, however, relieve the agency of responsibility for giving 
every applicant whatever help he may need and wish to use in arriving 
at a decision. 

The degree to which the first step can be distinguished from the next : 
depends on the applicant’s accurate knowledge of the agency and the ' 
assistance programs, his ability to relate this knowledge to his own • 
circumstances, and the agency’s procedure for receiving and recording r 
api)lications. If the agency requires a written application, there is no j 
difficulty in determining when the first step in the application process , 
ends. It ends when the applicant decides to formalize his application ^ 
in writing. I 

The time needed to complete the first step depends largely on the 1 
applicant, even though it is considered advisable for the agency to set a i 
reasonable time limit. For example, a person who has previously | 
applied for or received assistance may know enough about the pro- | 
grams to decide immediately to carry his application through to a 
final decision by the agency. In such cases, the first step takes only a 
few moments. Another applicant, after talking with the worker, may i 



o 


wisli to think the matter over and discuss it with his family before 
proceeding further. The agency should give him that opportunity, 
with the understanding that applications cannot pend indefinitely 
and that he should notify the agency of his decision at a date agreed 
upon. 

2. The second step begins when the applicant decides to continue 
the process of establishing his eligibility. During this step, the ex¬ 
ploration of eligibility is completed, and the agency reaches a decision 
to authorize assistance or to deny the application, subject, of course, 
to the applicant’s right to terminate his application at any point. The 
consideration of initial eligibility continues without delay in accord¬ 
ance with a plan worked out jointly by the applicant and the worker. 
The second step is terminated by one of three actions—^authorization 
of the amount of assistance, denial of assistance, or the applicant’s 
decision not to pursue his application further. 

3. The third step in the process concerns only approved applica¬ 
tions, since it begins with the authorization of assistance. This step 
does not involve direct contact with the applicant but, rather, includes 
the administrative procedures involved in getting the payment into 
the hands of the new recipient. In general, public welfare agencies 
have not fully recognized that the degree of efficiency with which this 
step is carried out affects the quality of service to applicants quite as 
much as does the case worker's sensitivity in interviewing applicants. 
The removal of barriers to prompt action in issuing payments, whether 
they result from organizational structure or administrative or fiscal 
procedures, should receive the immediate attention of each State 
agency. 

Interviewing Applicants 

The first and second steps are carried out by one or more interviews 
with the applicant and by whatever other means may be necessary to 
supplement the information the applicant can furnish to establish his 
eligibility. 

Each individual interview follows its own pattern and no two inter¬ 
views, even between the same two persons, can be identical. Since an 
interview is a joint undertaking, it develops in accordance with the 
needs of the moment and not according to a set plan. Application 
interviews are planning sessions. While the applicant is being en¬ 
couraged and assisted to tell his story and while the worker is bringing 
IQ in, at appropriate points, the information that the applicant needs to 
know, both are initiating the exploration of eligibility and are reach¬ 
ing an agreement on future plans and the activity of each. 

The number of interviews needed to determine eligibility depends 
_ on the individual situation. In general, if procedural requirements 
^ for determining eligibility are simplified, skilled interviewers should 





6 


be able in a larg:e number of instances to establish eligibility or in¬ 
eligibility in one interview. 

The purpose of the interview, the applicant’s specific situation, and 
agency facilities influence the choice of setting for the interview. In 
some instances an office interview may be more satisfactory than a 
home visit. The office setting is free from the distractions that exist 
in some homes and may be especially appropriate for persons who live 
in boarding homes or institutions. If, for some reason, the agency is 
unable to interview applicants when they first come to the office, the 
agency should arrange an appointment with the least possible delay. 

In the course of the application process, the worker should tell the 
applicant about the agency and the progi’ams and about his rights 
and responsibilities under the State plan. Some of this information 
is provided during the first step and some during the second. Many 
agencies give the applicants a descriptive pamphlet^ that includes 
much of the necessary information. A pamphlet is a helpful tool, but 
its use does not relieve the agency of the responsibility for oral inter¬ 
pretation of the programs during the course of interviews if applicants 
do not fully understand the agency’s functions and operation. 

An agency should make sure that, at appropriate points in the appli¬ 
cation process and as needed, each applicant is informed concerning: 

1. The programs administered by the agency, including: 

a. Conditions of eligibility, and 

b. Factual information required to establish eligibility, and to 
determine the amount of payment. 

2. How the agency operates, including: 

a. The participation of the agency in exploring eligibility, 

b. The agency’s responsibility for making the decision regard¬ 
ing eligibility or ineligibility, 

c. The method of determining the amount of payment, and 

d. When the applicant can expect a decision and how he will be 
notified. 

3. Provisions safeguarding an applicant’s right, including: 

a. Fair hearing, 

b. Confidentiality of information, and 

c. The money payment. 

4. A client’s responsibilities, including: 

a. The extent of the applicant’s participation in presenting 
facts to establish his eligibility, 

b. A recipient’s obligation to keep the agency informed of 
changes in his circumstances that affect continuing eligibil¬ 
ity or amount of payment. 


See Public Information, p. 8. 



7 


5. Other services and assistance available within the agency or 
from other sources to supplement or complement the assist¬ 
ance for which he has applied. 

In providing the foregoing information the worker’s concern is with 
the validity and extent of the applicant’s knowledge about agency and 
program, especially with the additional information he needs to under¬ 
stand fully the meaning of the application process to him personally. 
If the worker has this concern he will correct misunderstandings about 
the programs and will give the additional information the applicant 
needs. Even more important, the worker will give this information 
in simple terms and, to the best of his ability, at a logical and appro¬ 
priate point so that the applicant can relate the explanation to his 
own circumstances. 


The Opportunity to Apply 

The following minimum standards are essential to making the op¬ 
portunity to apply for assistance freely available to all persons: 

No person is refused the opportunity to apply for assistance. Oh- 
stacles to making application.^ such as requiring the presentation of 
preapplication proofs of eligibility or of information that indicates 
conclusively or presumptively the eligibility of the applicant as a 
condition to accepting the application.^ are inconsistent with this pro¬ 
vision. As one way of safeguarding the opportunity to apply^ agen¬ 
cies define and differentiate between applications and inquiries. 

Safeguarding the Opportunity to Apply 

Safeguarding the opportunity to apply for assistance depends on 
providing maximum assurance that no inquiry or application is ig¬ 
nored. It is necessary, therefore, that an agency’s instructions to 
staff distinguish clearly between inquiries and applications and em¬ 
phasize the importance of any appropriate follow-up, both on appli¬ 
cations and on inquiries that appear to be potential applications. It is 
recommended that, in defining and differentiating between inquiries 
and applications, agencies use some such definition of an inquiry as 
the following: An inquiry is a request for information unrelated to 
a request for assistance or, if related in general, not identifiable as such 
because the person inquiring does not go on to say specifically how the 
information requested applies to a specific individual’s need for assist¬ 
ance. An inquiry cannot be distinguished from an application merely 
by the method of requesting the information because both inquiries 
and applications may be received in identical ways. An inquiry is 
"■distinguished from an application by the intent of the person making 
the request to receive information rather than to receive assistance. 

Inquiries and applications sometimes come to the agency in the form 


791809*- 



8 


of referrals. A referral is a request for information, service, or 
assistance in behalf of an individual, made by an agency, an institu¬ 
tion, or another person. A referral received by an agency is classed as 
an inquiry unless or until the person making the referral states that he 
is acting for an applicant with the applicant's knowledge and consent. 

An important element in safeguarding the opportunity to apply is 
emphasizing to staff that an application has been made when the indi¬ 
vidual expresses to the agency either his desire to receive assistance or 
an interest in having his eligibility considered. Applications may be 
made orally or in writing, in person, or through another individual. 
Although both inquiries and applications are most frequently made at 
the agency’s office, they may also occur in a person’s home or in the 
home of a friend, on the street, over the telephone, .through the mail, or 
in other ways. 

As a further measure in safeguarding the opportunity to apply, it is 
recommended that, as soon as an applicant decides that he wishes an 
official determination of his eligibility or ineligibility, the application 
be formalized in writing on an application form. It is further recom¬ 
mended that the application form be as simple in content as possible 
and include a statement that the applicant wishes to receive a specific 
kind of assistance, believes he is eligible, and is willing to give the 
information that will help establish eligibility. When an application 
form or other statement in writing is used, it is usually signed by the 
applicant or by his guardian if the applicant is legally incompetent. It 
is recommended that notarization of signatures not be required. Each 
blind applicant or other person unable to read will need to have the 
application read to him, both to ensure that his statement is correctly 
recorded and that it represents the applicant’s wishes. Other data 
needed by the agency to begin the process of determining eligibility and 
the amount of the payment is best recorded on a separate form, such as 
a face sheet, that permits revision as conditions change or additional 
facts become available; or this information maj^ simply be included in 
the narrative. It should not cumber the application form. 

Public Information, Office Facilities, and Staffing 

Agencies may need to review their public relations programs to 
determine how best they can inform the community at large, and 
potential applicants in particular, about the assistance and services 
available through the public assistance agency. A method that is par¬ 
ticularly useful and pertinent to the application process is the distribu¬ 
tion of simply worded informational pamphlets to all applicants or 
persons visiting agency offices, and to other individuals, agencies, and 
institutions interested in and seeking specific information about the 
programs. Such pamphlets should describe the agency and its pro- 




9 


grams and tell how to apply, the conditions of eligibility, the methods 
of establishing eligibility, the rights and responsibilities of the 
applicant and recipient under the law, and the provisions of the law 
that safeguard their rights. 

Another factor in making the opportunity to apply available to 
all individuals relates to the facilities for interviewing applicants. 
A public assistance agency is responsible fcr providing office space 
that is readily accessible in the community and affords the applicant 
privacy and, so far as possible, freedom from inhibiting distractions 
and discomforts during interviews. The needs of the community may 
require itinerant interviewing points within a local administrative 
unit to supplement the facilities of the local office. Local agencies 
should schedule frequent and regular periods during which the office 
and interviewing points are open for interviewing, post the schedule 
conspicuously in public places, identify the office by outside signs 
bearing the exact name of the agency, and through other appropriate 
means inform the community served of the agency’s location and office 
, hours. 

An equally important element is the competence and adequacy of 
staff. It is recommended that applicants be interviewed by experi¬ 
enced and qualified members of the social work staff and, so far as 
^ possible, by the most skilled workers available. To assure that re¬ 
ceptionists in clerical positions are not assigned duties that should be 
assumed by members of the social work staff, the agency needs to de¬ 
fine and clarify the function of a receptionist as it relates to the ap- 
■ plication process. If assistance is to be made available effectively, it 
I is necessary to have sufficient staff to allow adequate and unhurried 
initial interviews with applicants and to complete the exploration of 
§ eligibility promptly. 

1. Promptness and Efficiency in the Application Process 

i The following minimum standards are essential to prompt and 
efficient consideration and action on applications: 

Agerwy policies and procedures p^'ovide for prompt and efficient 
carrying out of the application process. Agencies establish standards 
for evaluating and methods of controlling the length of time expended 
during the application pi'ocess. Included are methods by which the 
agency is kept regularly infoimied concerning the points in the ap¬ 
plication process at which delays are occurring and the reasons for 
delays. 

, Expediting the Application Process 

Public assistance programs under the Social Security Act are in- 
; tended to meet the needs of eligible applicants when that need occurs 







and the agency is informed of it, without applicants’ having to rely on 
other types of interim assistance from public or private social agencies. 
To achieve this purpose, the application process must be continuous 
and uninterrupted, without gaps in action either within or between 
the various steps. Agencies have a responsibility for eliminating con¬ 
ditions that hamper prompt action and for setting up procedures that 
make prompt staff action possible. Studying and planning how to 
eliminate delay may indicate the need for legislative amendments; the 
overhauling of cumbersome organizational, administrative, and fiscal 
policies and procedures; and the simplification of procedures for con¬ 
sidering and determining eligibility. Special attention will need to 
be directed toward such factors as the responsibility of the board in 
the organizational structure; decentralization of decisions relating to 
eligibility and amount of assistance; fiscal procedures for preparing 
authorization of payment and recipient pay rolls; issuance of checks ■ 
or warrants to recipients; and the exploration of eligibility. 

Prompt action on applications will come about more rapidly if each 
member of the staff whose work relates to any part of the process 
feels a definite responsibility for completing his part in the quickest 
time compatible with accepted standards of service to applicants. At 
the same time, he must know the standard of promptness that the 
agency expects of him. In setting such a standard, the agency 
must study the various aspects of the application process to determine 
what the delaying factors are and how they can be eliminated or re¬ 
duced, and to determine what the agency can reasonably expect of 
staff members. There appear to be four areas of activity in which 
delays are occurring. These are: (1) before assignment to a visitor 
for exploration of eligibility; (2) during the field exploration; (3) 
after the field work is completed but before the foitmal action which 
completes determination of eligibility is taken; and (4) after the 
determination of eligibility is made and during the preparation of 
authorization and issuance of checks or warrants. 

Study of the application process will enable agencies to determine 
what standard of promptness can reasonably be expected for the en¬ 
tire process and for its component parts. As factors causing delay 
are eliminated, the standard of promptness for each aspect and for 
the whole process can be reduced in length. Any standard established 
by the agency should be realistic in the light of conditions that cannot 
immediately be changed or remedied, but it also should be subject 
to revision as delaying factors are removed. A standard of prompt¬ 
ness should be related to the time needed to act on an average applica¬ 
tion. It will not represent the quickest nor the slowest time but will 
be reasonable for the majority of applications. 

When agencies emphasize the necessity for prompt action on appli- 


11 


cations and implement this by simplifying procedures for determining 
eligibility and making payments to eligible persons, it is reasonable 
to expect that the standard of promptness will gradually improve until 
only exceptional applications remain pending longer than a week. 

Controls 

A standard of promptness for all or parts of the application process 
has been found to be ineffective if it is relied on as the only method of 
speeding up the process. Consequently it is necessary to establish 
controls by which the agency is kept regularly informed concerning 
the points at which delays are occurring. In developing methods of 
controlling the time required to terminate applications, it is suggested 
that agencies consider as one method the establishment of a monthly 
reporting system, which will show the number of applications pending 
beyond the standard period and will indicate just where and why 
the delay has occurred for each application. By such a report the 
agency will discover weaknesses in administration toward which 
special attention should be directed both in supervision and in re¬ 
vision of procedures. Supervisors can use such a report to help staff' 
members recognize the causes of delays in their own activity and 
develop a plan of work that will result in more efficient and effective 
service to applicants. 

Various types of supervisory or administrative case reviews may 
be used. These reviews vary considerably in their effectiveness, de¬ 
pending on staff time available and the adequacy of over-all planning. 
To be of maximum value for the application process the reviews must 
provide for reading both approved and denied applications. 

Another method of getting information about action on applications 
is analysis of the causes of grievances, including both those handled by 
grievance procedures only and those that result in requests for a 
hearing. Isolation and study of grievances that result in delays may 
be used to locate inefficient procedures, to provide a basis for revision 
of policy and procedure, and to improve staff performance. 

Determination of Initial Eligibility 

The following minimum standards are essential to a sound deter¬ 
mination of initial eligibility: 

Agency 'policy provides for a determination of initial eligibility or 
ineligibility 'with respect to eojch application^ subject to an applicants 
right to decide not to pursue his application further. To implement 
this provision the agency: 

1. identifies the conditions of eligibility., 

2. provides that the application process shall include at least 
one interview with the applicant., and 


12 


3. indicates the kinds and sources of factual information that 
are acceptable as a basis for establishing eligibility and that 
meet the minimum essentials described in the following para¬ 
graph. 

A determination of eligibility is a decision by the agency on the 
basis of factual information that eligibility to receive assistance exists. 
The kinds of factual information that are acceptable as a basis for 
a decision concerning eligibility are oral statements., written material., 
and the observations of the icorker. Acceptable sources of factued 
information relating to eligibility include the applicant, members of 
his family, the agency worker, and other qualified persons. Informa¬ 
tion presented by the applicant concerning a condition of eligibility, 
if it is pertinent, consistent, and complete, is a satisfactory basis for 
the agency decision insofar as that condition is concerned. 

Exploring Eligibility 

In order to secure Federal financial participation in assistance pay¬ 
ments made under the Social Security Act, eligibility must be estab¬ 
lished individually for each recipient. The decision of the agency 
concerning eligibility or ineligibility is based on the facts and sound 
decisions cannot be achieved uniformly unless the agency identifies the 
eligibility conditions and indicates the kinds and sources of factual 
information that are acceptable to support a claim to assistance. The 
agency must also clarify for the worker and the applicant the re¬ 
sponsibility of each for obtaining factual information to support the 
applicant’s claim to eligibility and set forth the criteria for judging 
the adequacy of the facts obtained. 

Economy of operation and prompt action as well as other consider¬ 
ations of sound practice require the use of the best informed and most 
accessible sources of information. Among these the applicant may 
ordinarily be expected to rank first and, therefore, he should be utilized 
as the first and usually the principal source of facts. When the factual 
material the applicant presents meets the agency’s criteria of adequacy 
and is therefore judged to be pertinent, consistent, and complete with 
regard to all conditions of eligibility, it will not be necessary to consult 
additional sources. In most instances full utilization of the applicant’s i 
data will reduce the amount of exploration of other sources that the 
agency will need to undertake. The agency thus eliminates mineces- 
sary work and unproductive investigations of eligibility that often i 
delay the granting of assistance to eligible applicants and reviews of 
continuing eligibility. Prompt action on applications will thus be ; 
possible with no sacrifice of essential legal or administrative responsi¬ 
bility and without loss of Federal participation in initial payments. 

The use of the applicant as the primary source of information in 
determining eligibility means that the applicant and the worker are ' 





13 


jointly responsible for the facts and that, in many instances, the agency 
can determine eligibility or ineligibility on the basis of facts supplied 
by the applicant. Moreover, the agency criteria for determining 
when the facts presented are pertinent, consistent, and complete may 
properly include acceptance of facts presented orally by the applicant 
concerning his current circumstances or his personal and family his¬ 
tory that, when related to other known facts and combined with the 
observations of the worker, substantiate the applicant’s assertions con¬ 
cerning specific conditions of eligibility. In other words, the worker 
tells the applicant what conditions of eligibility he must meet and the 
factual information necessary to establish each condition. The ap¬ 
plicant and the worker review and discuss such information as the 
applicant has at hand, and determine for what conditions of eligibility 
information does not meet the agency’s criteria of adequacy or is not 
in the applicant’s possession. They then agree as to what additional 
information must be obtained from readily available sources and who 
will obtain it—the applicant or the worker at the applicant’s request. 

If an applicant is unprepared, physically or otherwise, to give in¬ 
formation to support his eligibility, kinds and sources of information 
may be selected from the agency’s suggested listing of acceptable 
sources of factual information, using those that can readily be obtained, 
and, whenever possible, those preferred by the applicant. 

The worker takes no step in the exploration of eligibility to which 
the applicant does not agree. If, however, as is true in some cases, 
the information that an applicant is prepared to present is incomplete, 
inconsistent, or indeterminate, the agency should tell him that addi¬ 
tional information is required. Usually, in such instances, the appli¬ 
cant and the worker can reach an agreement as to the sources to be 
used. Occasionally, however, the issue may be such that the applicant 
must decide whether to permit the agency to seek essential information, 
to drop his application, or to face having his application denied. 

In indicating the factual information that is acceptable, agencies 
will wish to include kinds that are frequently in the possession of 
applicants or readily obtainable and sources that have been discovered 
or previously used by the agency. A listing of acceptable kinds and 
sources of information will have greatest value if it serves the dual 
purpose of suggesting a variety of sources to the staff and at the same 
time stimulating their resourcefulness in using similar but less com¬ 
monly found sources when necessary. 

Furthermore, it is recommended that in preparing standards and 
procedures for determining eligibility, agencies avoid any of the fol¬ 
lowing actions: perfunctory visits to the home, to relatives or to refer¬ 
ences ; routine checking of public records; routine form letters or cor¬ 
respondence with employers, relatives, insurance companies, banks; 
listing, as preferred evidence, legal, official, or formal documents and 




14 


affidavits to be secured, wbether or not other acceptable factual in¬ 
formation is at hand or more readily available; requiring the appli¬ 
cant to sign a statement giving the agency blanket permission to in¬ 
vestigate any or all of his affairs that bear on his eligibility; and plac¬ 
ing more responsibility on the applicant than he is physically or 
mentally able to assume in establishing eligibility. 

The Decision 

The agency is responsible for coming to a definite decision concern¬ 
ing eligibility or ineligibility by either authorizing or denying assist¬ 
ance. To assure just and equitable determinations of eligibility, the 
agency’s decisions should be based on clearly defined policy. Estab¬ 
lishment of definite policies and procedures for exploring and deter¬ 
mining eligibility makes it possible to place upon the worker the re¬ 
sponsibility for reaching a decision on behalf of the agency. Giving 
this responsibility to the worker does not imply the removal of super¬ 
visory consultation and review. On the contrary, it places greater 
responsibility on the agency to give each worker the amount and kind 
of supervision that will help him develop the skills necessary to make 
valid decisions. Furthermore, it demands the development of super¬ 
visory processes that will keep the agency informed about the judgment 
and skill of each worker and that will aid in improving his .work. 

Capable and regular supervisory consultation and review, in general, 
provide the agency with satisfactory assurance that the facts of 
eligibility have been adequately explored, that agency policy has been 
suitably applied, and that a sound determination of eligibility has been 
made. The imposition of routine administrative decisions by means 
of case review units, boards, and other administrative devices cannot 
be justified. Too frequently, the substitution of such decisions for 
those of a worker and his supervisor prevents full consideration of all 
the facts and results in capricious actions rather than actions based on 
policy. Each added step in the agency determination of eligibility 
also lengthens the time required to act on applications. 

An agency should expect its workers to refrain from influencing 19 
applicants who are known or believed to be ineligible to withdraw 
their applications. A decision to withdraw an application can be 
valid only when it is, in fact, the applicant’s decision. Because the use 
of signed withdrawals has been abused, and dissatisfied applicants who 
sign withdrawals thereby often lose their opportunity for a hearing, 
the discontinuance of this practice is recommended. It is suggested 
that agencies substitute the practice of giving the applicant a statement 
confirming the agency’s understanding of his decision not to pursue his 
application further. In most cases, applicants welcome a written 
confirmation that verifies the conditions under which the application 
was terminated and establishes a basis upon which to present possible 


15 


grievances. Written confirmation of the applicant’s decision need not 
be a cumbersome or time-consuming process. It may be accomplished 
by a simple form filled in by the worker at the time of an interview and 
given to the applicant then, or completed after the interview and mailed 
to him. The agency’s confirmation of an applicant’s decision not to 
pursue his application is most useful if it contains the agency’s under¬ 
standing of the basis on which the decision was made. 

Payments to Eligible Applicants 

The following standard assures the initiation of assistance to appli¬ 
cants determined to be eligible: 

Assistance is paid to each eligible applicant and assistance is not 
(withheld from an eligible person so long as any payments whatever 
are being made under the specific category. 

Under the Social Security Act, agencies may not establish policies 
or procedures that result in failure to receive applications, to explore 
eligibility, to determine eligibility or ineligibility, or to make pay¬ 
ments to persons determined to be eligible; nor may they develop plans 
that result in undue delay in carrying out all or any part of the appli¬ 
cation process. This provision is particularly important for agencies 
that have chosen to deny or delay the granting of assistance to appli¬ 
cants because of insufficient funds. When funds are insufficient to 
make full payments in accordance with determined need, agencies are 
expected to devise a method of adjusting payments in such a way that 
all eligible persons will receive assistance. This provision is estab¬ 
lished with full recognition of the fact that inadequate payments to 
recipients frustrate the purpose of assistance programs as does the 
withholding of assistance from eligible persons. The imposition of 
formulas to limit the amounts of assistance payments is often neces¬ 
sary, but agencies need to study the effect of various methods of limit¬ 
ing payments, particularly the effect of maximum payments, in order 
to establish the most equitable way of administering inadequate funds. 
Wliile concerning itself with making the necessary adjustments to in¬ 
sufficient funds the agency can at the same time renew its efforts to 
secure appropriations adequate to meet the established need of all 
eligible individuals. 

Procedures Safeguarding an Applicant’s Rights 

In addition to the standards set forth above, it is important that 
agencies establish the following procedures essential to making the 
basic provisions more effective: 

1. Establish a basis for review of action on applications by providing 
for the mainteTiance of identifiable records co'nceming all 
applications. 



16 


2. Provide applicants with a basis for taking appropriate steps to 
express dissatisfaction with agency action or failure to act by: 

a. Establishing procedures for notifying applicants in writ¬ 
ing that assistance has been authorized in a stated amount 
or that it has been denied^ giving the reason for the denial, 

b. Establishing methods of notifying each applicant in 
writing of his right to a fair hearing ar\d the method by 
which he can obtain a hearing. 

In stating that there shall be an identifiable record with respect to 
each applicant for assistance, no specification is made as to its form. 
An identifiable record is one that can be located by number, alphabeti¬ 
cal listing, or some other systematic device. So long as a method of 
identification is provided, the recorded facts may be shown in any 
form the agency desires and may be filed by whatever system the agency 
finds most convenient. Usually the facts are recorded in the individual 
or family case record but a master file or special card form is sometimes 
used, especially when the interview has been short and the informa¬ 
tion brief. Whatever the form of the record, and however filed, it is 
essential that it be identifiable and readily accessible and that it con¬ 
tain current information concerning the status of the application. The 
record includes evidence that the agency has assumed responsibility 
for making available the opportunity to apply; pertinent, complete, 
and dated information concerning the facts that establish eligibility 
or ineligibility; and information concerning other services desired by 
the applicant and the plans and activity involved in providing such 
services. 

It is recommended that, as a measure to promote efficiency in the 
exploration of eligibility and in recording, agencies examine and 
evaluate the forms required in all records, for the purpose of reducing 
the number to a minimum, removing duplications, and eliminating 
nonessential information. 

Various methods are used to notify applicants in writing of the 
decision on their applications. The one used should provide assurance 
that such notifications are made promptly and consistently on all 
applications. Notification of decision is the only way an applicant 
can loiow where he stands with the agency and is the basis upon which 
he can complain about or appeal against a decision he considers unfair. 
Informing applicants in writing of the final decision is not a substitute 
for keeping the applicant informed concerning the status of his appli¬ 
cation during the entire application process. 

At the very beginning of his relations with the agency, an applicant 
should know about his right to request a fair hearing if the agency 
fails to act on his application or if he is dissatisfied with the agency’s 
decision. Notification of the right to a hearing should include full 




17 


information concerning the method of requesting it. An informa¬ 
tional pamphlet ® including simply worded facts about the hearing 
process can be given out at the initial interview and is a handy ref¬ 
erence for applicants and recipients as questions arise concerning their 
rights and responsibilities. Written notification of the right to a hear¬ 
ing should be supplemented by oral interpretation at the earliest 
appropriate point. 

Staff Development and the Application Process 

As agencies improve and strengthen their standards and procedures 
relating to the application process and to the determination of 
eligibility, a parallel emphasis should be placed on staff development. 
The staff will need to understand the objectives of the standards, 
their meaning to individuals applying for and receiving assistance, 
and specific ways to use the standards in the day-by-day job. 

Too frequently, changes in policy are delayed on the grounds that 
staff are unable to apply them, whereas an accompanying staff develop¬ 
ment plan, designed to equip staff, might well prepare the way for the 
desirable change. Conversely, changes in policy are sometimes put 
into effect without sufficient consideration of the preparation required 
by staff for making effective use of the policy. It is recommended, 
therefore, that agencies initiate a reevaluation of their staff-develop¬ 
ment activities as they relate to the application process and determi¬ 
nation of inital eligibility. This should include consideration of both 
content and method in orientation of staff, in regular supervisory 
practices, in group conferences planned for special training purposes, 
and in other phases of staff development. 

Initial efforts to improve standards for the application process 
should be accompanied by a plan that identifies the areas in which the 
effectiveness of the application of the standards depends on the under¬ 
standing and acceptance of staff and the quality of their performance. 
The use of the applicant as the primary source of information in 
determining eligibility, for example, requires competence in inter¬ 
viewing. Securing facts necessary to determine eligibility, accuracy 
in evaluating these facts, and ability to develop a joint plan with the 
applicant for getting supplementary information are essential skills 
in using this standard. The supervisor should direct special attention 
toward helping staff members relate the policies and standards to 
individual situations. Supplementary training sessions may be re¬ 
quired in which emphasis is placed on clear understanding of the 
policy and its purpose, application of the policy in individual situa¬ 
tions through planned and well-focused discussion of selected case 


® See Public Information, p. 8. 




18 


materials, and case work principles that are applied in establishing a 
constructive working relationship with applicants. 

A standard of promptness with respect to the application process 
cannot be implemented unless the staff is convinced of the importance 
of promptness. They will be convinced as they understand the pur¬ 
pose of an assistance program in providing economic security and the 
demoralizing effect that delay in receiving assistance has on the appli¬ 
cant. If, for any reason, the staff has become insensitive to the effect j 
of delay on the applicant, the agency will need to provide an oppor- i 
tunity for them to reconsider the significance of such standards for I 
the individual. Special attention should be directed toward helping j 
workers develop and use constructive work plans that will enable them 
to achieve the standard without sacrificing quality of work. If staff 
vacancies or high rates of turnover exist in particular local offices, 
the supervisory staff may require assistance in developing a realistic 
work plan to get the job done. In the initial effort to establish a 
standard of promptness, the cooperation and contribution of com¬ 
petent staff members may be secured in setting a realistic standard 
based on their experience in eliminating unproductive activity. These 
experiences and concrete suggestions should be useful for the purpose 
of interpretation at the time the specific standard is introduced. 

The analysis of the application process, presented on pages 3-5, may 
be used as a guide to agencies in reevaluating the staff development pro¬ 
gram and may suggest areas of content that should receive special 
attention in interpretation to staff. 

Considerable progress has been made in the development of clearly 
defined policy and in improving the application of policy to individual 
case situations. No agency will claim that all its policies are fully 
refined and complete, and each worker knows that his performance is 
improved by continuous supervision and other opportunities for 
learning. Each agency has made progress along certain lines and 
needs to work further in other areas. For agencies that have estab¬ 
lished the basic structure and effective methods of staff development, 
the introduction of new policies relating to applications means util¬ 
izing the available structure to explain new content. In agencies that 
have laid the groundwork for understanding current concepts of ad¬ 
ministering public assistance, but have delayed in developing applica¬ 
tion policies entirely consistent with their philosophy, the task of staff 
development lies in helping staff to relate new policies and procedures 
to familiar principles. If, in some instances, basic philosophy and 
principles are not firmly established, the agency has a much larger job, 
tliat of reorienting its staff to current concepts while at the same time 
improving its initial orientation toward the same goal. Under such 
conditions the agency needs to assume greater responsibility for guid- 



19 


ing workers in order to achieve a uniform interpretation of all pro¬ 
gram objectives. Helping staff to understand and use new policy 
relating to applications will be only one phase of an over-all reevalua¬ 
tion and revamping of the staff-development program. 

Policies and procedures and staff competence are inextricably in¬ 
terrelated and dependent one on the other. The smooth interaction of 
policies and staff performance support and carry forward the purpose 
of i)ublic assistance. The failure of either means weaknesses in the 
program and distress for needy applicants and recipients. 

Selected References 

1. Bishop, Margaret K. “Study of the Application Process.” Caseload Report, 

September 19'i6. Pennsylvania Department of Public Assistance, Philadel¬ 
phia County Board of Public Welfare, 112 North Broad Street, Philadelphia 
2, Penn.sylvania. September 1946. Processed, 10 pp. 

2. —“The Visitor’s Job in a Public Assistance Agency.” Pennsylvania Depart¬ 

ment of Public Assistance, Philadelphia County Board of Public Welfare, 
May 1947. Processed, 7 pp. 

3. Garrett, Annette. Intervieiving, Its Principles and Methods. New York; 

The Family Welfare Association of America, 1942. 123 pp. 

4. Goetz, John L. “Local Public Relations.” Public Welfare. Vol. 4, No. 9, 

September 1946. pp. 194—197. 

5. Hamilton, Gordon. Principles of Social Case Recording. New York: Colum¬ 

bia University Press. 1946. 142 pp. 

6. Kahn, Dorothy C. “Democratic Principles and Public Assistance: Case Work 

in Determining Eligibility.” The Compass. Vol. XX, No. 10, August 1939. 
pp. 3-8. 

7. Lindeman, Eduard C. “Social Case Work Matures in a Confused World.” 

The Compass. Vol. XXVIII, No. 2, January 1947. pp. 3-5. 

8. Marcus, Grace. The Mature of Service in Public Assistance Administration. 

Washington, D, C.: U. S. Government Printing Office. (U. S. Social Security 
Administration, Bureau of Public Assistance Report No. 10) 1946. 31 pp. 

9. Nixon, Evanell. “Current Emphases in Public Assistance.” Mimeographed 

paper given at In-Service Training Meeting, December 1945. Topeka, Kan¬ 
sas: Kansas State Board of Social Welfare, March 1946. 21pp. 

10. Smith, A. Delafield. “Community Prerogative and the Legal Rights and 

Freedom of the Individual.” Reprint from Social Security Bulletin, Au¬ 
gust 1946. 6 pp. 

11. Sontheimer, Morton. “The Better Mousetrap.” Journal of Social Casework. 

Vol. XXVIII, No. 9, November 1947. pp. 354^355. 

12. Towle, Charlotte. Common Human Needs; An Interpretation for Staff in 

Public Assistance Agencies. Washington, D. C.: U. S. Government Print¬ 
ing Office, 1945. (U. S. Social Security Board, Bureau of Public Assistance 

Report No. 8) 1945. 132 pp. 

13. Turner, J. Sheldon. “Considerations Basic to the Review of Policy and 

Practice in the Administration of Public Assistance.” August 1946. Proc¬ 
essed, 10 pp.' 

14. Tyler, Inez. Intake in a Public Agency. Chicago: American Public Wel¬ 

fare Association. 1941. 14 pp. 





20 


15. U. S. Department of Labor. (Retraining and Re-Employment Administra¬ 

tion) The Intervieio in Counseling. Washington, D. C.: Government Print¬ 
ing Office, July 1946. 25 pp. 

16. U. S. Social Security Administration. (Bureau of Public Assistance) “Case 

Records in Public Assistance; A Series of Case Materials Selected From 
Public Welfare Agencies.” Vol. I, No. 1, Technical Training Service, July 
1947. Proces.sed, 71 pp. 

17. — “Public Assistance Goals—1947.” November 1946. Processed, 21 pp, 

18. Voiland, Alice L.; Martha Lou Gundelach, Mildred Corner. Developing In¬ 

sight in Initial Intervieios. New York: Family Service Association of 
America. 1947. 54 pp. 

19. Webber, Alice. “Interviewing.” Social Security Bulletin. Vol. 3, No. 4, 

April 1940. Federal Security Agency, pp. 11-16. 


U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE; I9J« 


For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington 25, D. C. 

Price 10 cents 



SOURCES OF REVENUE 


FOR THE STATE SHARE 
OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 
1939-47 


I 

4K 


FEDERAL SECURITY AGENCY 
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION 
BUREAU OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 


PUBLIC ASSISTANCE REPORT NO. 15 







FEDERAL SECURITY AGENCY 

Oscar R. Ewing, Administrator 

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION 

Arthur J. Altmeyer, Commissioner 


BUREAU OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 

Jane M. Hoey, Director 



SOURCES OF REVENUE 

FOR THE STATE SHARE 
OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 
1939-47 


By ELIZABETH G. EPLER 


FEDERAL SECURITY AGENCY 
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION 
BUREAU OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 

PUBLIC ASSISTANCE REPORT NO. 15 





H Vs-s- 

./ 1 3-7^ 






TfUtW9 


FOREWORD 


r 


Information on sources of State revenues for public assistance pre¬ 
sented in this report brings up to date, through the fiscal year 1947, 
information previously summarized for the special types of public 
assistance for 1939 and for general assistance as of January 1940. 
With the great rise in total State revenues during the war years, the 
States tended increasingly to rely on general-fund revenues rather 
than earmarked revenues in meeting the State share of assistance. 
Earmarked revenues continue, however, to play a major part in the 
financing of public assistance in a number of States. 

The information on revenue som'ces is one segment of a study of 
State appropriations for assistance. The data should be useful in 
special analyses of the adequacy of the public assistance programs in 
relation to fiscal capacity. The data should be of value also in assist- 
mg States to devise more nearly equitable methods of allocating State 
and Federal funds among local units. 

For purposes of this study, the information on State appropriations 
compiled by the Bureau of Public Assistance was checked and supple¬ 
mented by staff members of the State assistance agencies, who also 
provided much valuable interpretive information. Every effort has 
been made to assure accuracy of the data and comparability from 
State to State in the classification of earmarked revenues. 

Special acknowledgment is due to members of the Bm-eau staff who 
participated in work on the report—to Gladys AI. Krueger, who helped 
compile the data for individual States; to Herman W. Gruber, who 
helped classify and tabulate tbe data on sources of revenue; and to the 
Bureau’s Regional Research Consultants, who checked the data with 
the State agencies. Our special thanks go to all staff members of 
State public assistance agencies who made this stud.y possible. 

Jane AI. Hoey, Director 
Bureau of Public Assista nce 

June 1948. 


Ill 


/s* 



CONTENTS 


Page 


Introduction_ 1 

General-Fund and Earmarked Revenues_ 3 

Methods of Earmarking Revenues for Public Assistance-_ 4 

Effects of Earmarking Revenues_ 5 

Trends in Use of General and Earmarked Revenues, 1939-47 _ 7 


Types of Revenues Earmarked, 1939-47_ 10 

Patterns in the Fiscal Year 1947_ 13 

Conclusion_ 16 


Appendix A.—Year and month in which Federal funds were 
first used for assistance payments under currently approved 
plans (as of fiscal year ended June 30, 1947)_ 

Appendix B.—Financial responsibility for the non-Federal 
share of public assistance, by State, as of fiscal year ended 
June 30, 1947_ _ 

Appendix C.^—Programs for which State funds were not avail¬ 
able for part or all of the period 1939-47, by State and fiscal 
year_ 

Appendix tables: 

Table 1.-—Sources of State revenues—general and earmarked— 
for public assistance, 1939-47_ 

Table 2.—Types of State revenues earmarked wholly or partly 
for public assistance, 1939-47_ 

Table 3.—Number of States with earmarked revenues for public 
assistance derived from specified sources, 1939-47_ 

Table 4.—Number of programs with earmarked revenues for 
public assistance derived from specified sources, 1939-47_ 


17 


18 

18 

19 



24 

! 

24 


IV 
















INTRODUCTION 


The broad program of social security established under the Social 
Security Act includes assistance programs for the needy aged, depend¬ 
ent children, and the needy blind. Under provisions of titles I, IV, 
and X of the act, Federal grants for these special types of public 
assistance are made available to States with plans approved by the 
Social Security Administration. One of the requirements that the 
States must meet in order to claim Federal funds is State financial 
participation in the cost of the special types of public assistance. 
Whether the non-Federal share of the cost is met enthely from State 
funds or from both State and local funds is determined by the State. 

General assistance is administered without Federal financial 
participation. Since its financing is entirely a State and local respon¬ 
sibility, each State determines whether the costs are to be met from 
State funds or local funds or both. Patterns of State-local financial 
participation in the special types of public assistance and general 
! assistance not only vary from State to State but often differ among 
F programs within a State. 

Although a large number of States had enacted enabling legislation 
■ for old-age assistance, aid to the blind, and aid to dependent children 
(or “mothers’ aid”) before the Social Security Act was passed, many 
of the State laws were optional in chai-acter and operative in relatively 
few counties. The requhement of the Social Security Act that 
programs for which Federal grants-in-aid are claimed must be oper¬ 
ative in all political subdivisions of the State made for substantial 
increase in the geographical coverage of many programs. With the 
provision of Federal funds and the requirement for State financial 
participation, there was rapid expansion in total funds available for 
the programs previously financed enthely from State and/or local 
funds. In addition, new programs were established under the stimulus 
of the Social Security Act. 

By September 1938, about three years after the Social Security 
Act was passed, all States were making old-age assistance payments 
under approved plans, with Federal financial participation. The 
other special types of public assistance expanded somewhat less 
rapidly than old-age assistance (appendix A). By January 1944, all 
States except Nevada were claiming Federal funds for aid to depend¬ 
ent children; in Nevada the localities continue to assume the sole 
financial responsibility for this program. Tliree States (Missouri, 
Nevada, and Pennsylvania) continue to administer aid to the blind 
under State laws with State or State and local funds but without 
Federal participation. By November 1945, all the other States were 
administering aid to the blind under plans approved by the Social 
Security Administration. 


1 



Tims in the fiscal year 1947, a total of 147 progi-ams for the special C! 
types of public assistance were in operation in the continental United J 
States. Federal funds were provided under approved plans for all S 
but four of these programs and State funds for all but one. Local 
funds were provided for 65 of the 147 programs (appendix B). 

In addition, some funds for general assistance were available in all 
States. The general assistance programs were financed entirely from 
State funds in 2 States and the District of Columbia, from both a 
State and local funds in 31 States, and entirely from local funds in a 
the other 15 States (appendix B). » 

Although local funds, typically derived from property taxes, are of 
considerable importance in financing programs in some States, they t 
constitute a relatively small part of the total expenditures for assist- • 
ance. In the fiscal year ended June 30, 1947, only about 11 percent 
of the total bill for all types of assistance payments to recipients was 
' met from local funds, in contrast to almost 46 percent met from State 
funds and 43 percent from Federal funds. Percentage-wise, local a 
funds were considerably more important in financing general assistance 
than in financing the special types of public assistance. In terms of I 
total dollar amounts, however, the special types of public assistance f 
drew more heavily than general assistance on local funds. The $58 
million spent for general assistance from local funds was about two- f 
fifths of total expenditures for this type of aid; local funds of $88 I 
million for the special types of public assistance made up about a ' 
seventh of all State-local expenditures for these programs. A con- i 
siderably larger share of the total cost of all types of public assistance 
was met from State funds than from local funds not only in the Nation 
as a whole but in almost every State. 

This report summarizes for the fiscal years 1939-47 the basic som’ces 
of State revenues—general funds, earmarked taxes, or both—for all 
public assistance programs in the continental United States in which 
there was State financial participation, whether or not Federal funds 
were provided.^ In addition, the report includes information on the ; 
specific types of taxes earmarked for assistance by the States that used | 
_ 

1 The sources of revenue reported are those from which funds were made available for the State share of 
assistance payments to recipients. Generally, costs of administration and assistance are met from the same 
sources in any given State, but insofar as sources of revenue for assistance payments differ from those for , 
administrative costs the latter are not covered by this report. 

Fiscal year, as used in this report, is the State fiscal year ending within the given calendar year. For most 
States, each fiscal year ended on June 30. A few States shifted, within the years 1939-47, from other fiscal 
periods to those ending on June 30. One State shifted from a July-June fiscal year to a fiscal year ending with 
March. The 1947 fiscal year covered the period July 1,194fr-June 30,1947, for all States except the following: 

State 1947 fiscal year 

Alabama____ Oct. 1,1946-Sept. 30,1947 

New York, Washington, Wyoming..... Apr. 1, 1946-Mar. 31, 1947 

Ohio___ Jan. 1, 1947-Dec. 31, 1947 

Pennsylvania___June 1, 1946-May 31, 1947 

Texas......Sept. 1,1946-Aug. 31,1947 


2 









earmarked revenues alone or in combination with general-fund reve¬ 
nues to finance the State share of one or more assistance programs. 
Sources of local revenue are not included. 

All programs for which State funds were made available are covered 
by this report, even though in a few instances no State funds were used 
within a given year for assistance payments to recipients.^ State 
funds were available throughout the period for old-age assistance in 
all 49 States (including the District of Columbia), for aid to the blind 
in 46 States, for aid to dependent children in 43 States, and for general 
assistance in 33 States.® 

The information presented here on the sources of State revenues was 
collected as part of a study which covered also the total amounts of 
State funds made available for public assistance programs in each 
State. The data on actual amounts available are useful in analysis 
of fiscal patterns for given States but will not be summarized for all 
States because of lack of comparability of data from State to State 
and from year to year. 

Comparability is affected particularly by variation in periods covered 
by appropriations and by the wide variety of, and changes in, programs 
for which lump-sum appropriations are made. Some appropriations 
are for annual, others for biennial, periods. Although the fiscal year 
for most States is July-June, total available funds relate to other 
fiscal periods in a few States.^ Some of the States that make lump¬ 
sum appropriations provide such over-all amounts for two or more 
assistance programs; some other States provide lump-sum appropri¬ 
ations for assistance programs and various other welfare purposes. 
Such appropriations, in contrast to separate appropriations for specified 
programs, of course make for greater flexibility in the use of assistance 
funds.® 

General-Fund and Farmarked Revenues 

In each State, general-fund revenues, in contrast to earmarked 
revenues, include all funds not specifically set aside for special pur¬ 
poses. “Earmarking’’ is the term most frequently used to describe 
the various methods of assigning proceeds of certain designated taxes 
or assessments to special purposes. In some instances, the relation¬ 
ship between the type of tax and the purpose for which the proceeds 
are reserved is a direct one, as in the case of the pay-roll taxes for 
unemployment insurance and old-age and survivors insurance. 


2 See table 1, footnotes 7,11, and 12 for Kentucky, South Dakota, and Texas. 

2 See appendix C for list of programs for which State funds were not available during part or all of the 
period 1939-^7. 

* See footnote 1, page 2. 

• A brief discussion of the use of lump-sum appropriations is included in “Sources of Revenue and Types 
of Appropriation for the State Share of Assistance Programs, Fiscal Year 1947,” Social Security Bulletin, 
May 1948. 


3 





Proceeds from motor-vehicle and gasoline taxes have typically been 
assigned to highway funds reserved for construction and maintenance 
of roads, presumably on the assumption of a reasonably direct rela¬ 
tionship between the amount of such taxes paid by the automobile 
owner and his use of the highways. The earmarking of a given tax 
for a directly related purpose has been known as the benefit theory of 
taxation. 

No such direct relationship exists, however, between the many types 
of taxes earmarked for public assistance and the purpose for which they 
are earmarked, and undoubtedly the factors determining the types of 
taxes so earmarked differ greatly from State to State. 

The number of States that earmark a given type of tax for assistance 
is not necessarily, of course, the total number of States using such 
taxes in financing public assistance. Wlien assistance is financed from 
general-fund revenues, each type of revenue paid into the State general 
fund may be assumed to contribute toward such financing. General 
sales taxes, for example, were in effect during the 1947 fiscal year in a 
total of 23 States, including 7 that earmarked such taxes for assistance. 
In all 23, sales tax revenues were undoubtedly of considerable impor¬ 
tance to the assistance programs. 

For purposes of this report, the listing of specific types of revenue 
is limited to those earmarked for assistance and does not include those 
paid into the general funds of the States that financed assistance 
wholly or partly from general-fund revenues. Types of taxes earmarked 
for the State share of assistance have been classified insofar as possible 
in accordance with classifications and definitions followed by the Bureau 
of the Census. The listed earmarked taxes include all those from 
which collections for a given year were to be set aside for public 
assistance, although in a few instances no receipts were actually 
available for this purpose.® Taxes from which only the collections of 
penalties and delinquent taxes due in earlier years became available 
for assistance have not been included in the list of taxes earmarked for 
any given year. 

Methods of Earmarking Revenues for Public Assistance 

Most commonly, when revenues are earmarked for assistance, all 
revenues from certain taxes (except costs of collection) or specified 
percentages of such revenues are assigned to one or more programs. 
In some instances, specified dollar amounts or specified proportions 
of revenues up to given dollar maximums are so assigned, or a specified 
amount or proportion of the proceeds in excess of the amount assigned 
to other purposes may be earmarked for assistance. In other instances, 
the assistance programs are “charges” against the earmarked revenues, 

« For example, there were no collections from the earmarked taxes on racing in Arkansas in 1945, when 
no racing meet was held. 


4 







although no amount or proportion of such revenues is specifically set 
aside for these programs except by regular legislative appropriation. 

In some States, collections from earmarked revenues are transferred 
directly to assistance funds and determine the amounts available for 
one or more programs. Revenues may be allotted to a single program 
or as a lump-sum to two or more programs; in two of the States that 
earmark the same revenues for several programs the proportions to be 
allocated to various programs are specified by law. 

In some other States, legislative appropriations from earmarked 
revenues rather than collections determine the amounts available for 
assistance. In these instances, unless provision is made for use of 
general-fund revenues when earmarked revenues are insufficient, col¬ 
lections limit the amounts available if they are less than the appro¬ 
priations, but the appropriations limit amounts available when col¬ 
lections exceed appropriations. For example, in Arkansas, where all 
public assistance programs are financed from revenues allocated to the 
public welfare fund, revenues earmarked for the fund were insufficient 
to meet the appropriations in 1939-41 ; in subsequent years, revenues 
assigned to this fund exceeded the amounts appropriated, but accumu¬ 
lated balances remaining in the fund were not available for 
expenditure.^ 

Florida, on the other hand, has attempted to guarantee availability 
of specified amounts by providing that the appropriations minus any 
amounts available from earmarked revenues shall be met from general 
revenues. Connecticut has each year provided $2,225,000 for old-age 
assistance and aid to the blind from assessments on the towns, to be 
met from the State per capita tax levy. The State provided first for 
loans, then for outright transfers, from the general fund to make up 
differences between the totals of the assessments and the amounts 
appropriated. 

Some other States that use both general and earmarked revenues to 
finance assistance programs appropriate specific amounts from general 
revenues, in addition to whatever amounts become available from 
earmarked revenues. 

Effects of Earmarking Revenues 

The earmarking of revenues for assistance is intended to assure their 
availability for this purpose, and undoubtedly in some States, when 
general funds have been depleted, earmarked revenues have provided 
more nearly adequate funds for assistance than would otherwise have 
been made available from general-fund appropriations. But earmark¬ 
ing is not without serious disadvantages. The assistance agency’s 
problem of budgeting funds is increased when the amounts available 

’’ Through 1945, the public welfare fund consisted of earmarked revenues. In 1946 and 1947, specified 
percentages of all general revenues were allocated to the public welfare fund. 


793415°—48-2 


5 




depend on tax collections that vary from month to month. Further¬ 
more, earmarking sometimes results in limiting unnecessarily the i 
amount available for assistance. Tax yields are generally affected by 
changes in economic conditions, and some types of taxes are subject 
to greater fluctuation than others. The earmarking of taxes unusually !i 
sensitive to business fluctuations leads inevitably to sharp declines in 
available funds at the very time when the need for public assistance is i 
greatest. Earmarking of revenues may result in either disproportion- j 
ately high or disproportionately low amounts for public assistance in ' 
relation to funds available for other important functions of govern¬ 
ment. On the whole, general-fund revenues are more likely than ear¬ 
marked revenues to provide a sound financial base for the public 
assistance programs. 


6 



TRENDS IN USE OF GENERAL AND EARMARKED 

REVENUES, 1939-47 


Most of the States met their share of the cost of each public 
assistance program in which there was State financial participation 
from the same basic source or soiu'ces of revenue tliroughout the period 
1939-47. Twenty-three States financed all programs from general 
revenues throughout the period, five financed all programs entirely 
from earmarked revenues, and one drew on both general and ear¬ 
marked revenues for all programs (table 1). Five other States, 
which drew on general revenues only for one or more programs and 
on earmarked revenues only or a combination of general and ear¬ 
marked revenues for other programs, followed the same pattern of 
financing each program in all years in which State funds were pro¬ 
vided. The 34 States that used the same sources of revenue through¬ 
out the period were: 


Source of State funds for public assistance, fiscal 
years 1939-47 

Number of 
States 

States 

All programs financed entirely from general rev¬ 
enues. ' 

23 

California, Delaware, District of Co¬ 
lumbia, Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, 
Kentucky, Michigan, Mississippi, 
Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, 
New Jersey, New York, North 
Carolina, Peimsylvania, South Caro¬ 
lina, Tennessee, Vermont, Virginia, 
Washington, West Virginia, Wis¬ 
consin. 

All programs financed entirely from earmarked 
revenues. 

5 

Kansas, Nebraska, New Mexico, 
Texas, Utah. 

All programs financed from both general and ear¬ 
marked revenues. 

1 

Alabama. 

1 or more programs financed entirely from general 
revenues, others entirely from earmarked rev¬ 
enues. 

2 

Colorado, Nevada. 

Some programs financed entirely from general 
revenues, others from general and earmarked 
revenues. 

3 

Comiecticut, Illinois, Ohio. 


The remaining 15 States changed the sources of revenue for the 
State- share of one or more of the public assistance programs within 
the period. Twelve of these States shifted to general-fund financing 
for one or more programs within the period 1939-47. Only three 
States (Iowa, North Dakota, and Oregon) made changes in the direc¬ 
tion of relatively greater use of earmarked revenues. 

Among the 12 States that shifted from earmarked to general 
revenues, the 10 listed below made changes resulting in general-fund 
financing of all assistance programs by 1946. 


7 










State 

Fiscal years in 
which all pro¬ 
grams were fi¬ 
nanced from gen¬ 
eral revenues 
only 

Programs' financed wholly or partly 
from earmarked revenues, by fiscal 
years 

Arizona __ 

1946, 1947_ 

BCG, 1939-43; A, 1939-45. 

ABCG, 1939-45. 

ABCG, 1939, 1940; AG, 1943, 1944. 

A, 1942-45. 

ABCG, 1939. 

A, 1939-45. 

G, 1939^5. 

G, 1939. 

ABC, 1939. 

ABCG, 1939. 

Arkansas__ 

1946, 1947_ 

Louisiana_ 

1941,1942,1945-47. 

1939- 41, 1946,1947. 

1940- 47 .- 

Maine _ - - __ 

Maryland _ 

Massachusetts_ __ 

1946, 1947_ 

lVTinrip. 80 t,a .. 

1946, 1947 .- 

Rhode Island __ 

1940-47 _ 

South Dakota _ - -_ 

1940-47. 

Wvoming' . 

1940-47 _ 




1 A designates old-age assistance; B, aid to the blind; C, aid to dependent children; G, general assistance. 


In addition to these 10 States, Oklahoma shifted from earmarked 
to general revenues for general assistance, but continued to meet the 
State share of the special types of public assistance entirely from ear¬ 
marked revenues. Florida, which previously had used earmarked 
revenues for both old-age assistance and aid to the blind, in 1945 
made an appropriation for aid to the blind and old-age assistance 
available from the general fund only; an additional appropriation for 
old-age assistance was to be met from earmarked revenues and, insofar 
as necessary, the general fund. 

The three States that shifted to more extensive use of earmarked 
revenues all changed from using both general and earmarked revenues 
to using earmarked revenues exclusively. In Iowa, only the general 
assistance program was affected. The change in the method of 
financing the State share of general assistance in 1942 coincided with 
a sharp drop in expenditures; Iowa made no expenditures from State 
funds for this program after 1945. North Dakota and Oregon, which 
had earlier drawn on both general and earmarked revenues for all 
programs, from 1944 on used earmarked revenues only. In both of 
these States the exclusive use of earmarked revenues was presumably 
due to the rise in collections of earmarked taxes rather than to any 
change in the legal base for financing the programs. The North 
Dakota sales tax legislation and legislation appropriating funds for 
public assistance continue to be interpreted to mean that, if that part 
of the sales tax allocated to the public welfare fund is insufficient to 
meet the specific appropriations for assistance, the general fund may 
be drawn upon. In Oregon, assistance funds have been made available 
by legislative transfers from receipts from liquor taxes and insofar as 
necessary from the general fund. 

A total of 33 States financed the State share of all programs entirely 
from general revenues in 1946 and 1947, in contrast to 24 States using 
general revenues only in 1939. 


8 






























Number of States meeting State share of public 
assistance from— 





General and earmarked revenues 

Year 

General 
revenues 
only, all 
programs 

Earmarked 
revenues 
only, all 
programs 

General revenues 
only, 1 or more 
programs; ear¬ 
marked only or 
general and ear¬ 
marked, other 
programs 

Other com¬ 
binations of 
general and 
earmarked 
revenues 

1939__ 

24 

9 

10 

6 

1940____ _ 

29 

8 

8 

4 

1941____ 

29 

8 

8 

4 

1942..___ 

28 

7 

10 

4 

1943__ 

27 

7 

11 

4 

1944...__ 

27 

8 

12 

2 

1945....... 

28 

8 

11 

2 

1946...____ 

33 

7 

8 

1 

1947...... 

33 

7 

8 

1 




In terms of programs, the State share of assistance for 136 of the 
180 public assistance programs was met entirely from general revenues 
in 1947; by contrast, general revenues only were used for 106 of the 
176 programs in which there was State financial participation in 1939. 
Shifts from earmarked revenues to general-fund financing consider¬ 
ably more than offset the few changes in the opposite direction. 


Year 

Number of programs with State funds 
from general revenues only 

Number of programs with State funds 
from earmarked revenues only or from 
general and earmarked revenues 

Total 

OAA 

AB 

ADC 

GA 

Total 

OAA 

AB 

ADC 

GA 

1939_ 

106 

28 

29 

28 

21 

70 

21 

17 

16 

16 

1940_ 

120 

32 

33 

31 

24 

55 

17 

13 

12 

13 

1941_ 

122 

32 

33 

33 

24 

57 

17 

14 

13 

13 

1942_ 

121 

31 

34 

33 

23 

57 

18 

14 

13 

12 

1943_ 

120 

30 

34 

34 

22 

59 

19 

14 

13 

13 

1944_ 

123 

30 

35 

36 

22 

55 

19 

13 

12 

11 

1945_ 

125 

31 

35 

36 

23 

53 

18 

13 

12 

10 

1946_ 

136 

35 

38 

37 

26 

44 

14 

11 

11 

8 

1947_ 

136 

35 

38 

37 

26 

44 

14 

11 

11 

8 


Partly because of the much greater volume of expenditures for old- 
age assistance than for the other special types of public assistance, and 
the consequently greater need for drawing on new sources of revenue to 
finance this program, taxes were somewhat more frequently ear¬ 
marked for old-age assistance than for the other programs during the 
period 1939-47. Similarly, a relatively high proportion of the States 
earmarked revenues for general assistance in 1939, when total expendi¬ 
tures from State funds for this program were higher than State ex¬ 
penditures for all the special types of public assistance combined. 

In 1939, State funds for 21 of the 49 old-age assistance programs 
and 16 of the 37 general assistance programs came wholly or partly 
from earmarked revenues; in the same year, the State share was,met 
wholly or partly from earmarked revenues for 17 of the 46 aid to the 


9 





























































blind programs and 16 of the 44 programs for aid to dependent chil¬ 
dren. By 1947, the total number of programs financed entirely or 
partly from earmarked revenues had dropped to 44, from a high of 70 
in 1939. This decrease reflected the drop in the use of earmarked 
revenues for assistance programs of each type. Revenues continued, 
however, to be earmarked for a relatively high proportion of old-age 
assistance programs. State funds from earmarked revenues were 
provided, in 1947, for 14 of the 49 old-age assistance programs, 11 of 
the 49 aid to the blind programs, 11 of the 48 aid to dependent children 
programs, and 8 of the 34 general assistance programs in which there 
was State financial participation. 

During the war years, when State tax revenues in general rose to 
unprecedented levels, collections both of revenues assigned to general 
funds and of types of revenues earmarked for public assistance showed 
increases in most States.^ Perhaps for this reason, there was some 
tendency to meet the State share of assistance either entirely from 
general revenues or entirely from earmarked revenues. Within the 
period 1939-47, there was a relatively greater decline in the number 
of programs financed from both general and earmarked revenues than 
in the number financed entirely from earmarked revenues. By 1947, 
5 States were financing a total of 10 programs from general and ear¬ 
marked revenues; in 1939, 10 States financed 20 programs from both 
these sources of revenues. In the same period, 1939-47, the number 
of programs financed entirely from earmarked revenues dropped from 
50 in 18 States to 34 in 11 States, 

TYPES OF REVENUES EARMARKED, 1939-47 

Of the 26 States that made use of earmarked revenues in financing 
public assistance within the period 1939-47, a total of 22 earmarked 
general sales or use taxes and/or sales taxes on selected commodities 
or services, such as liquor or tobacco or public-utility receipts (tables 
2 and 3). The general sales taxes are of course levied on the whole 
buying population; they frequently include taxes on specifically 
enumerated commodities or services, such as taxes on admissions and 
amusements, on public-utility receipts, and on restaurant meals, 
but they differ from the separately imposed taxes on selected com¬ 
modities in that the general sales or gross receipts taxes are imposed 
also on retail sales of all commodities not specifically exempted. The 
selective sales taxes are separately imposed taxes on specified com¬ 
modities and services, many of which may be considered “luxuries.” 

For purposes of this report, earmarked taxes have been broadly 
classified as follows: general sales, use, or gross receipts taxes; sales 
-{- 

S Revenues from some types of taxes, including sales taxes on gasoline and tobacco, and the various types 
of racing revenues typically declined in some years because of war-time shortages and restrictions. 


10 






taxes on selected commodities and services; license and privilege taxes; 
and other types of revenue, including individual and corporation 
income taxes, property taxes, and per capita taxes. Per capita taxes, 
like the general sales taxes, may be said to be imposed on the general 
population, whereas most of the others are presumed to be related to 
ability to pay. 

General and selective sales taxes and license and privilege taxes, 
chiefly liquor license fees, have been more commonly earmarked for 
public assistance than have other types of taxes. A total of 13 States 
earmarked general sales taxes for 43 programs during all or part of the 
period 1939-47 (tables 3 and 4). All but two of these States (North 
Dakota and Utah) earmarked also sales taxes on selected commodities 
and/or services, and nine additional States earmarked selective sales 
taxes. 

Among the various types of sales taxes on selected commodities 
and services, those on alcoholic beverages have been most commonly 
earmarked for public assistance. A total of 15 States assigned sales 
taxes on alcoholic beverages to one or more of the assistance programs 
during all or part of the period 1939^7. Other types of selective sales 
taxes earmarked for public assistance include tobacco taxes (six 
States), taxes on admissions and amusements (four States), taxes on 
motor fuels, public-utility receipts, and pari-mutuels (each type of 
tax earmarked by three States), and taxes on cosmetics, restaurant 
meals, sale of used cars, motor vehicles in general, radios, playing 
cards, carbon black, cement, oil and gas-well servicing, and insurance 
premiums. 

In general, earmarking of sales taxes on alcoholic beverages was 
accompanied by earmarking of liquor license fees. Eleven of the 15 
States that assigned sales taxes on alcoholic beverages to public assist¬ 
ance similarly earmarked various types of license and privilege taxes 
on alcoholic beverages. Two of these same States (Oregon and 
Wyoming) and one additional State (Alabama) earmarked also pro¬ 
ceeds from the State liquor monopolies. 

License and privilege taxes on amusements and/or race tracks were 
earmarked by five States; corporation-franchise taxes or taxes on cor¬ 
poration assets were earmarked by three States, and other types of 
license fees, such as vending-machine and special types of automobile 
licenses, by four States. 

Less commonly earmarked for public assistance were the various 
types of taxes other than sales and license and privilege taxes. Four 
States earmarked taxes on real property, and one additional State 
(Maryland) earmarked, in 1939 only, taxes on personal property. 
Both individual and corporation income taxes were assigned to public 
assistance programs by four States, death and gift taxes by three 
States, severance taxes on the extraction of oil or other minerals by 


11 



three States, per capita taxes by two States, and other miscellaneous 
taxes, including taxes on stock transfers and the recording of legal 
documents, by three States. 

Most of the 26 States that have financed public assistance from any 
sources of revenue other than the State general fund have earmarked 
more than one type of tax. Only one State (Utah) met the entire 
cost of the State share of all public assistance programs throughout 
the period 1939-47 from a single type of earmarked taxes—general 
sales and use taxes. Only four other States earmarked a single type 
of tax within the period: 


Type of earmarked tax State 

Per capita tax_ Connecticut. 

Selective sales tax on tobacco products_ Maine. 

Selective sales tax on motor fuels_ Rhode Island. 

Property tax-_ Minnesota. 


The remaining 21 States have earmarked various combinations of 
taxes as follows: 


Types of taxes earmarked within the period 1939-47 
for 1 or more assistance programs 

Number of 
States 

States 

General and selective sales taxes, license and privilege 
taxes, other revenues. 

5 

Arkansas, Colorado, Iowa, New Mexi¬ 
co, Wyoming. 

General and selective sales taxes and revenues other 

1 

Arizona. 

than sales taxes or license and privilege taxes. 



General and selective sales taxes, license and privilege 

1 

South Dakota. 

taxes. 



General and selective sales taxes.-- _ _ 

4 

Illinois, Kansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma. 

General sales taxes, license and privilege taxes_ 

1 

North Dakota. 

Selective sales taxes, license and privilege taxes, other 
revenues. 

5 

Maryland, Massachusetts, Nebraska, 
Oregon, Texas. 

Selective sales taxes, license and privilege taxes_ 

1 

Florida. 

Various selective sales taxes_ 

1 

Ohio. 

Revenues other than sales taxes or license and priv- 

2 

Alabama, Nevada. 

ilege taxes. 



In general, the States that have earmarked taxes for more than one 
of the assistance programs have earmarked the same types of taxes 
for all these programs. Several States, however, have earmarked 
additional taxes for old-age assistance. For example, Alabama pro¬ 
vides 10 percent (up to a maximum of $200,000) of the net proceeds 
of State liquor stores, as well as lump-sum general-fund appropria¬ 
tions, for various welfare programs; in addition, after payments are 
made to pensioners from the Confederate veterans’ pension fund, 
derived from a 1-mill property tax, the balance in the fund is made 
available for old-age assistance. Colorado assigns to old-age assist¬ 
ance the revenues from certain corporation-franchise and death and 
gift taxes, in addition to revenues from general sales taxes and liquor 
sales taxes and license fees, earmarked also for aid to the blind, aid to 
dependent children, and child welfare services. New Mexico since 
1944 has allotted to old-age assistance the proceeds from a tobacco 


12 


















tax, in addition to any allocations to this program from revenues ear¬ 
marked for all welfare programs, from the compensating use tax, sales 
and license taxes on alcoholic beverages, the corporation-franchise 
tax, and the oil severance tax. In North Dakota, which earmarks 
general sales taxes for all assistance programs, an amusement-device 
tax imposed in 1942 has been earmarked for old-age assistance only. 
Oregon has also earmarked a tax on coin-operated machines and other 
amusement devices for old-age assistance only, although expenditures 
for this program as well as the other assistance programs are met 
almost entirely from legislative appropriations from the liquor reve¬ 
nues. In Texas, funds for all assistance programs are provided from 
the omnibus tax clearance fund, consisting of revenues from a wide 
variety of taxes, chiefly selective sales taxes; additional taxes on 
tobacco, amusements, and coin-operated machines are available for 
old-age assistance only. 

PATTERNS IN THE FISCAL YEAR 1947 

In the fiscal year 1947, 33 States financed the State share of all 
their public assistance programs entirely from general revenues. 
These 33 States provided State funds for a total of 122 programs— 
the special types of public assistance in all States and general assist¬ 
ance in 23 States. 

Seven of the 16 States using earmarked revenues for public assist¬ 
ance drew on these revenues only for all programs; the others used 
general-fund revenues solely or in combination with earmarked reve¬ 
nues for one or more programs. 

These 16 States provided State funds for a total of 58 programs—■ 
all four assistance programs in 11 States, the three special types only 
in 4 States, and old-age assistance and aid to the blind only in 1 
State. State funds for 34 of the 58 programs were made available 
solely from earmarked revenues; 14 were financed enthely from gen¬ 
eral-fund revenues, and 10 from combined earmarked and general 
revenues. 

Various taxes were earmarked for public assistance, but as was 
generally true in earlier years sales taxes were more frequently ear¬ 
marked than other types of revenues. Thirteen States earmarked 
either general sales or use taxes or selective sales taxes or both. Most 
of these same States earmarked other types of taxes as well. 

In only a minority of the States earmarking revenues for public 
assistance in 1947 did the receipts from such revenues directly deter¬ 
mine the amounts available for the State share of assistance payments. 
In most States either legislative action was required to transfer ear¬ 
marked revenues to the assistance agencies or general-fund appropria¬ 
tions were provided in addition to the earmarked revenues. 


13 






Sources oj State Revenues for Public Assistance, 1947 



Of course, earmarked revenues are generally subject to legislative 
control, in that State legislation determines the types of revenues, 
and the proportions of such revenues, to be set aside for public assist- 
ance. When additional legislative control is exercised over funds 
available from earmarked revenues, appropriations from such reve¬ 
nues usually bear some relationship to the amount of anticipated 
collections. Thus in all States using earmarked revenues, both legis¬ 
lation and receipts influence the amount of available funds. Never¬ 
theless, a distinction may be made between the programs for which 
amounts available are directly contingent on collections from ear¬ 
marked revenues and those for which specific legislative appropria¬ 
tions are made from earmarked revenues. 


Factors determining total amounts avaUable for assistance in States financing 1 or more programs entirely 

from earmarked revenues, fiscal year 1947 


Legislative appropriations 

Colorado_ _ BC i 

Colorado_ 

Nebraska_ 

Collections 

... A 
... ABC 

Iowa..A 

Kansas_ ABCG 

North Dakota__ABCG 

Oregon_ A^ BCG 

Texas..... ABC 

Utah___ABCG 3 

Nevada_ 

New Mexico... 
Oklahoma_ 


... A 

... ABCG 3 
... ABC 


' Legislative maximums on amounts made available from earmarked revenues. 

2 In addition to the lump-sum appropriation from earmarked revenues for all programs, a relatively 
small amount determined by collections was available for old-age assistance only from the amusement- 
device tax. 

2 Beginning with April 1947, amounts available were determined by appropriations; previously the 
emergency relief fund, consisting of earmarked revenues, was appropriated to the governor for welfare 
purposes. 

< Specified amount made available from severance tax; specified percentages of collections available from 
other earmarked taxes. 


14 


















































Alaximum amounts to be made available from earmarked revenues 
were set by legislative action for 22 of the 34 programs financed entirely 
from earmarked revenues in 1947; receipts from the specified percent¬ 
ages of revenues earmarked for public assistance determined amounts 
available for the other 12 programs. Except for Colorado, in all States 
that provided funds from earmarked rev^enues only for more than one 
assistance program, amounts available for each program were deter¬ 
mined in the same general way—that is, either by legislative appropria¬ 
tions or by collections. 

Colorado’s constitution provides for the allocation to old-age assist¬ 
ance of 85 percent of net revenues from all general sales or use taxes and 
all alcoholic-beverage sales and license and privilege taxes “now or 
hereafter levied” and 100 percent of net revenues from certain surtaxes 
on inheritances and incorporation fees. Continuing appropriations for 
aid to dependent children, aid to the blind, child welfare services, and 
an emergency and contingent fund are made from the remaining 15 
percent of the general sales and use taxes and the taxes on alcoholic 
beverages. 

In Utah, before the 1946 fiscal year, all revenues earmarked for pub¬ 
lic assistance and other welfare purposes and assigned to the emergency 
relief fund were “appropriated to the governor” for the specified pur¬ 
poses, and thus amounts determined by collections became dhectly 
available to the assistance agency. In 1945 the State legislature 
limited the amount which could become available by an act, effective 
until July 1, 1947, which provided for transferring to the State general 
fund at the beginning of each quarter any amount over $6 million in 
the emergency relief fund. In 1947 the legislation that had provided 
for appropriation of the emergency relief fund to the gov^ernor was 
amended to read, in part, “Expenditures from said fund shall be made 
as provided by legislative appropriations . . . ,” and specific appro¬ 
priations were made for the months of April, May, and June 1947. 
Thus during the first 3 calendar quarters of the fiscal year amounts 
available to the Utah agency were contingent on receipts from the 
earmarked sales and use taxes, subject to legislative limitation on the 
total amount that might be retained in the emergency relief fund. 
During the last quarter of the year, however, amounts were directly 
controlled by legislation. Amounts available were similarly deter¬ 
mined by legislative appropriations in Iowa, Kansas, North Dakota, 
Oregon, and Texas. 

Of the five States in which amounts available depended on collections 
from earmarked revenues, one State (Nebraska) appropriated the esti¬ 
mated total receipts from earmarked revenues; actual receipts rather 
than the estimated total included in the appropriation act determined 
the amount available for assistance. In Oklahoma, amounts becom¬ 
ing available to the State assistance fund from the general sales and 


15 


tobacco taxes are limited only by receipts, but the proportions of total 
earmarked revenues to be available for each program are specified by 
the State legislature. For 1947, 75 percent of the total was for old-age 
assistance only, 17 percent for aid to dependent children, 2 percent for 
aid to the blind, 1 percent for child welfare services and services for 
crippled children, and the remaining 5 percent for administration of 
all these programs. 

In Nevada, the rate of the property tax levy for old-age assistance is 
determined by the legislature on the basis of the estimated needs of 
the program; collections from this additional tax levy then determine 
the amount available. 


CONCLUSION 

Throughout the period 1939-47, State funds for most of the public 
assistance programs were derived from general revenues. There was a 
trend during the period away from the use of earmarked revenues. 
Whether this trend, which accompanied the significant increase in 
State revenues during the war years, would continue in a period of 
declining revenues is problematical. 

Typically the State legislatures have exercised direct control over 
funds available for public assistance. Even when revenues were 
specifically set aside for public assistance, amounts made available 
for assistance within a given period were often limited by direct 
legislative appropriations or by legislative maximums set on amounts 
to be available or on balances to be retained in assistance funds. 

Declines in the number of States earmarking particular types of 
taxes corresponded roughly to the decrease in the total number of 
States using earmarked revenues for public assistance. There were 
no identifiable trends in the earmarking of any given type of tax. 
Tlu-oughout the period covered by this report, general and selective 
sales taxes were most frequently earmarked for public assistance. 
Types of taxes earmarked in any given State were influenced by a 
great variety of factors, analysis of which would necessarily involve 
consideration of the whole pattern of revenues and expenditures and 
the fiscal capacity of the State. 


16 


Appendix A 

Year and month in which Federal funds were first used for assistance 'payments under 

currently approved plans 

(as of fiscal year ended June 30,1947) 


state 

OAA 

AB 

ADC 

Alabama__ 

Feh. 1936 

Apr. 1937 

Feb. 1936 
July 1945 
June 1936 
Apr. 1936 
July 1936 
Apr. 1936 
Dec. 1941 
Aug. 1936 
Feb 1936 

Alaska_ 

July 1937 
July 1937 
Mar. 1936 

Arizona... 

Jime 1936 
Apr. 1936 
July 1936 
Apr. 1936 
July 19381 

Arkansas.. 

California_ _ . 

Apr. 1936 
Apr. 1936 
Apr. 1936 
Feb. 1936 

Colorado_ 

Connecticut_ . 

Delaware_ 

District of Columbia... 

Mar. 1936 

Apr. 1936 
Jan. 1938 

July 1937 
Nov. 1937 

Florida__ 

Oct. 1936 

Sept. 1938 

July 1937 
.Tnnp, 1937 

Georgia..... . 

July 1937 
Sept. 1936 
Feb. 1936 

Hawaii... 

Idaho___ 

Feb. 1936 

Feb. 1936 

Illinois__ 

July 1936 
Apr. 1936 
Feb. 1936 

Oct. 1943 

Oct. 1941 

Indiana___ ... 

Apr. 1936 
Nov. 1937 

Sept. 1936 
Jan. 1944 

Iowa ... 

Kansas___ . 

Aug. 1937 
Aug. 1936 
June 1936 

Sept. 1937 
Dec. 1942 

Aug. 1937 
Jan. 1943 

Kentucky___ ... 

Louisiana______ 

July 1937 
Feb. 1936 

June 1936 

Maine___ .. _____ ... 

Dec. 19372 

Feb. 1936 

Maryland..__ _ 

Feb. 1936 

May 1936 
Apr. 1936 
July 1936 
July 1937 
Nov. 19383 

Feb. 1936 

Massachusetts_ . . __ 

Feb. 1936 

Apr. 1936 
Sept. 1936 
Sept. 1937 
3 Mar. 1941 

Michigan___ 

Feb. 1936 

Minnesota_ _ ... _ 

Mar. 1936 

Mississippi__ __ 

Feb. 19.36 

Missouri_ _ _ 

Feb. 1936 

Jan. 1938 

Montana___ __ 

June 1936 

May 1938 
Mar. 1936 

Apr. 1937 
Apr. 1936 

Nebraska____ 

Feb. 1936 

Nevada_ _ _ 

Aug. 1937 

New Hampshire . __ __ 

Feb. 1936 

Feb. 1936 

Feb. 1936 

New Jersey_ 

Apr. 1936 
May 1936 
May 1936 
July 1937 
May 1936 
Feb. 1936 

July 1936 
Jtme 1936 

Apr. 1936 
June 1936 

New Mexico . _ .. .. _ 

New York_ 

May 1937 
July 1937 ‘ 
Jan. 1937 

May 1937 
July 1937 
Oct. 1937 

North Carolina__ 

North Dakota___ 

Ohio.. __ 

July 1936 
Feb. 1937 

July 1936 
*Oct. 1936 

Oklahoma.. _ 

Apr. 1936 
Apr. 1936 

Oregon___ ___ 

May 1936 

June 1937 

Pennsylvania . _ __ 

July 1936 
Feb. 1936 

(®) 

Aug. 1936 

Rhode' Island___ _ 

July 1939 

Jan. 1937 

South Carolina__ 

Aug. 1937 

Aug. 1937 

Aug. 1937 

South Dakota_ _ 

Oct. 1936 

Feb. 1938 

Nov. 1940 

Tennessee_ _ . 

July 1937 
July 1936 

July 1937 

July 1937 


Oct. 1941 

Oct. 1941 

Utah ___ .. _ 

Mar. 1936 

Mar. 1936 

Mar. 1936 

Vermont - . ____ 

Feb. 1936 

Apr. 1936 

Mar. 1936 

Virginia _ _ . > _ __ 

Sept. 1938 

Sept. 1938 

Sept. 1938 

Washington . __ 

Feb. 1936 

Apr. 1936 

Feb. 1936 

West Virginia_ . 

Wisconsin _ . _ 

Nov. 1936 
Feb. 1936 

Jan. 1937 
Feb. 1936 

Jan. 1937 
Feb. 1936 

Wvominp’ . _ . _ 

Feb. 1936 

Feb. 1936 

Feb. 1936 






> Federal funds previously used for assistance payments in February-June 1936. 

2 Federal funds previously used for assistance payments in May 1936-August 1937 

3 Federal funds previously used for assistance payments in February-March 1936. 

< Federal funds previously used for assistance payments in April-July 1936. 

5 Federal funds used for assistance payments in February 1936-December 1937 only. 


17 



































































Appendix B 

Financial responsibility for the non-Federal share of public assistance, by State, 

as of fiscal year ended June SO, 1947 


Financial responsi¬ 
bility for general 
assistance pay¬ 
ments 

Non-Federal share of special types of public assistance financed from— 

State funds only 

State and local funds 

State fimds only, 1 or more 
programs; State and local 
funds, other programs 1 

State funds only_ 

State and local 
funds. 

Ariz.j D. n.j Pa 



Ark., Ill., La., Mich., 
Mo., N. Mex., Okla., 
R. I., S. C., Wash., W, 
Va. 

Ala., Kans., Md., Mont., 
N. J., N. Y., Oreg., 
Utah, Va., Wis. 

Colo., Conn., Del., Me., 
Mass., Minn., N. Dak., 
Ohio, Vt., Wyo. 

Local funds only.... 

Fla., Idaho, Ky., Miss., 
Nebr., S. Dak., Tex. 

Calif., Ga., Nev.,^ N. C., 
Term. 

Ind., Iowa, N. H. 


1 In the listed States, programs financed from State or State and local funds as follows: 


State 

State fmids 
only 

State and 
local funds 

Colo_ 

OAA 
OAA, AB 
OAA, AB 
OAA, AB 
AB 

AB 

AB 

ADC, AB 
ADC 
ADC 
ADC 

OAA, ADC 
OAA, ADC 
OAA, ADC 

/ Corm_ 

Del... 

Me.... 

Mass. 

Minn. _ 

N. Dak. _ 



State 

State funds 
only 

State and 
local funds 

Ohio -.. 

OAA, AB 

ADO 

Vt___ 

OAA, AB 

ADC 

Wyo.. 

AB 

OAA, ADC 

Ind.. 

AB 

OAA, ADC 

Iowa... 

OAA 

ADO, AB 

N. H....... 

ADO, AB 

OAA 


2 State and local funds for old-age assistance and aid to the blind, local funds only for aid to dependent 
children. 

Appendix C 

Programs for which State funds were not available for part or all of the period 1939- 

47 , by State and fiscal year 


Program and State 

Years for 
which State 
funds not 
available 

Program and State 

Years for 
which State 
funds not 
available 

Aid to the blind 


General assistance 


Delaware... 

1939-45 

California__ ... 

1942^7 

Nevada.... 

1939-41 

Florida .... 

1 939-47 

Texas.. 

1939-40 

Georgia . . 

1939-47 



Idaho__ 

1942-47 



Indiana_ 

1939-47 

Aid to dependent children 


Iowa_ _ 

1944-47 



Kentucky_ 

1939-47 

Iowa____ 

1939-43 

Mississippi 

19.‘^9-47 

Kentucky... 

1939-42 

N ebraska 

1 a‘^9-47 

Mississippi... 

1939-40 

N evada 

1944^7 

Nevada....... 

1939-47 

New Hamp.shire 

1 a‘^9-47 

South Dakota.... 

1940 

North Carolina 

19.'^<M.7 

Texas____ 

1939-40 

South Dakota 

1 a'^9-47 



Tennessee... 

1939-47 



Texas..... 

1939-47 



Vermont.. 

1939^5 


18 





































































Table 1. —Sources of State revenues—general and earmarked—for 'public 

assistance, 19S9-47 


state 

Source of 
revenue 

Fiscal year ending in— 

1939 

1940 

1941 

1942 

1943 

1944 

1945 

1946 

1947 

Ala__.. 

GF and ER 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

Ariz-.- 

OF only 






BCG 

BCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 


GFand ER 

G 







ER only 

ABC 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

A 

A 



Ark_ 

GF only 








ABCG 

ABCG 


ER only 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

Calif... 

GF only 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 1 

ABC I 

Colo... 

GF only 

G 

G 

G 

G 

G 

G 

G 

G 

G 


ER only 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

A2BC 

A2BC 

A2BC 

Conn.. 

GF only 

CG 

CG 

CG 

CG 

. CG 

CG 

CG 

CG 

CG 


GF and ER 

AB 

AB 

AB 

AB 

AB 

AB 

AB 

AB 

AB 

Del.... 

GF only 

A CG3 

A CG3 

A CG3 

A CG3 

A CG3 

A CG3 

A CG3 

ABCG3 

ABCG3 

D. C... 

GF only 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

Fla.... 

GF only 








B 

B 


GFand ER 

C 

C 

C 

C 1 

C 3 

C * 

A Cl 

A P, 4 

A Cl 


ER only 

AB 5 

AB 5 

AB 5 

AB 5 

AB 5 

AB 5 

B 5 



Ga._ 

GF only 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

Idaho. - 

GF only 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

Ill_ 

GF only 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 


GF and ER 

G 

G 

G 

G 

G 

G 

G 

G 

G 

Ind_ 

GF only 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

Iowa... 

GF only 

B 

B 

B 

B 

B 

BC 

BC 

BC 

BC 


GFand ER 


G 

G 








ER only 

A G 

A 

A 

A G 

A G 

A 6 

A 6 

A 6 

A 6 

Kans.. 

ER only 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

Ky.._. 

GF only 

AB 7 

AB 7 

AB 7 

AB 7 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

La_ 

GF only 



ABCG 

ABCG 

BC 

BC 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 


GFandER 


ABCG 



A G 

A G 





ER only 

ABCG 









Me_ 

GF only 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

BCG 

BCG 

BCG 

BCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 


GFandER 




A 

A 

A 

A 



Md.... 

GF only 


ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 


ER only 

ABCG 









Mass.. 

GF only 

BCG 

BCG 

BCG 

BCG 

BCG 

BCG 

BCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 


GFandER 

A 

A 

A 

A 

A 

A 

A 



Mich-. 

GF only 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

Minn. 

GF only 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABCG 

ABCG 


GFandER 


Qs 

Gs 

G8 

G8 

G8 

G8 




ER only 

G8 









Miss... 

GF only 

AB 

AB 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

Mo_ 

GF only 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

Mont.. 

GF only 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

Nebr.. 

ER only 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

Nev .. 

GF only 

G 

G 

G 

B G 

B G 

B 

B 

B 

B 


ER only 

A 

A 

A 

A 

A 

A 

A 

A 

A 

N. H-_ 

GF only 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

N. J-.-. 

GF only 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

N.Mex 

ER only 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

N. Y._ 

GF only 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

N. C_- 

GF only 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

N.Dak. 



ABCG 









ABCG 


ABCG® 

ABCGo 

ABCG® 






ER only 





ABCG® 

ABCG® 

ABCG® 

ABCG® 

Ohio... 

GF only 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 


GFandER 

G 

G 

G 

G 

G 

G 

G 

G 

G 

Okla 

GF only 

G 



G 

G 

G 

G 

G 

G 


ER only 

ABC 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 


HF anH FT? 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 






ER only 



ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

Pa_ 

GF only 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

R. I... 

GF only 

ABC 

G 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

S. C.._ 

GF only 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

S.Dak. 

GF only 


AB 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 



B 










ER only 

A 10 C 11 










See footnotes at end of table. 


19 






























































Table 1. —Sources of State revenues—general and earmarked—for public 
assistance, 1939-4 ?—Continued 


State 


Fiscal year ending in— 



revenue 

1939 

1940 

1941 

1942 

1943 

1944 

1945 

1946 

1947 

Term.. 

GF only 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

Tex_ 

ER only 

A 

A 

ABC 12 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

Utah 

ER only 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

Vt. 

GF only 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABCG 

ABCG 

Va. 

GF only 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

Wash.. 

GF only 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

W. Va. 

GF only 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

AVis.... 

GF only 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

AVyo... 

GF only 


ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 


ER only 

ABCG 


« 


















Note: For source of revenue: GF designates general-fund revenues; ER earmarked revenues. 

For programs: A designates old-age assistance; B, aid to the blind; C, aid to dependent children; 

G, general assistance. 

1 No State funds made available for general assistance after 1941, but legislation effective July 14, 1945, 
provides for State participation in direct and administrative costs of welfare activities in any county in which 
annual expenditure rate for such activities exceeds 8/100 of 1 percent of total assessed valuation of property 
subject to county tax. 

2 For old-age assistance only, general-fund appropriations of $500,000 for January-June 1945 and $1,500,000 
for each of the fiscal years 1946 and 1947 could have been made available under specified conditions if needed 
to make payments in full. 

3 Regular legislative appropriations for general assistance for 1939,1942, and 1943; in other years and in 1939 
amounts made available for this program by Permanent Budget Commission from State Emergency Fund. 

‘ Use of general revenues for aid to dependent children authorized to make up difference between appro¬ 
priations and receipts from earmarked revenues; general revenues not available for all years. 

® Appropriations for old-age assistance and aid to the blind could be met from both earmarked and general 
revenues, but actual source of funds earmarked revenues only for old-age assistance 1939-44 and for aid to the 
blind 1939-45. 

® No funds appropriated or earmarked for general assistance after 1943, but balances remained available; 
no expenditures from State funds for this program in 1946 or 1947. 

' No payments from State funds for aid to the blind before 1943, but aid to the blind included among 
programs covered by lump-sum appropriations for welfare activities. 

s Financed as needed by issuance of certificates of indebtedness to be redeemed by property-tax levy; 
levy could be reduced when any portion of appropriation met from general revenues. 

* Use of general revenues authorized for all programs to make up difference between appropriations and 
receipts from earmarked revenues. 

10 Use of general revenues authorized to make up difference between appropriation and receipts from ear¬ 
marked revenues. 

a Earmarked revenues available in 1939 for aid to dependent children transferred to old-age assistance in 
1940; no expenditures for aid to dependent children from State funds until 1941. 

a Funds made available for aid to dependent children and aid to the blind by legislation effective May 
1941, but no expenditures for these programs until October 1941. 


Table 2. —Types of State revenues earmarked wholly or partly for public assistance, 

1939-4? 


State 


Fiscal year ending in— 


1939 

1940 

1941 

1942 

1943 

1944 

1945 

1946 


1947 


A. General sales, use, or gross receipts taxes: 


Arizona.. 

BCG 

ABCG 

ABC 

G 

A G 
ABCG 
ABCG 

ABCG 

ABC 

ABC 

ABCG 

ABCG 

BCG 

ABCG 

ABC 

G 

A G 
ABCG 
ABCG 
ABCG 

ABCG 

BCG 

ABCG 

ABC 

G 

A 

ABCG 

BCG 

ABCG 

ABC 

BCG 

ABCG 

ABC 





Arkansas.... 

Colorado...... 

Illinois.. 

ABCG 

ABC 

ABCG 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

Iowa.. 

Kansas...... 

Louisiana___ 

A G 
ABCG 

A 

ABCG 
A G 
ABCG 
ABCG 
ABC 

A 

ABCG 
A G 
ABCG 
ABCG 
ABC 

A 

ABCG 

A 

ABCG 

A 

ABCG 

New Mexico i_ 

North Dakota.. 

Oklahoma 2 __ 

South Dakota_ 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABC 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABC 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABC 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABC 

Utah_ 

Wyoming___ 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 











See footnotes at end of table. 


20 



































































Table 2. —Types of State revenues earmarked wholly or partly for public assistance, 

19S9-47 —Continued 


State 


1939 


Fiscal year ending in— 


1940 

1941 

1942 

1943 

1944 

1945 

1946 

1947 


B. Sales taxes on selected commodities and services: 3 


Arizona—. 

Arkansas_ 

Colorado_ 

Florida_ 

Iowa___ 

Kansas_ 

Maryland_ 

Massachusetts. 

Nebraska_ 

New Mexico... 

Ohio_ 

Oregon_ 

South Dakota. 

Texas_ 

W yoming_ 


Louisiana_ 

Nebraska_ 

Rhode Island. 


Arizona_ 

Illinois_ 

Maine_ 

New Mexico. 
Oklahoma. 
Texas_ 


nilnois 

Ohio... 

Texas.. 


Arkansas_ 

Florida_ 

Massachusetts 


Arkansas. 
Maryland 

Ohio_ 

Texas_ 


Maryland_ 

Massachusetts 

Oklahoma_ 

Texas_ 


BCG 

ABCG 

ABC 

ABC 

BCG 

ABCG 

ABC 

ABC 

BCG 

ABCG 

ABC 

ABC 

G 

ABCG 

B>CG 

ABCG 

ABC 

ABC 

G 

ABCG 

BCG 

ABCG 

ABC 

ABC 

G 

ABCG 





ABCG 

ABC 

ABC 

ABCG 

ABC 

ABC 

ABO" 

Tb'c"‘ 

ABCG 

ABCG 

A 

ABC 

ABCG 

G 

ABCG 

ABC 

A 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

A 

ABC 

ABCG 

G 

ABCG 

A 

ABC 

ABCG 

G 

ABCG 

A 

ABC 

ABCG 

A 

ABC 

ABCG 

A 

ABC 

ABCG 

A 

ABC 

ABCG 

ABC 

ABCG 

ABC 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

A 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 









Motor-vehicle fuels 

ABCG 

ABC 

G 

ABCG 

ABC 








ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 










Alcoholic beverages 


Tobacco products 


BCG 

BCG 

BCG 










A 

A 

A 


BCG 

G 

A 

BCG 

G 

A 





G 

A 

A 

ABC 

G 

A 

A 

ABC 

G 

O 

A 

ABC 

A 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 








Public utilities < 


G 

G 

G 

G 




ABC 


ABC 


ABC 





G 

ABC 

G 

ABC 

G 

ABC 


G 


ABC 


Pari-mutuels 


ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

A 

A 

A 


ABCG 

A 

A 


ABCG 

A 

A 


ABCG 

A 


ABCG 

A 

A 


Admissions and amusements < 


ABCG 

ABCG 

G 

A 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 





G 

A 

G 

A 







A 

A 

A 

A 

A 

A 

Other * 

ABCG 











A 

A 

A 

A 






G 

G 

ABC 


ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 




See footnotes at end of table. 


21 






















































































































































Table 2. —Types of State revenues earmarked wholly or partly for public assistance, 

1939-47 —Continued 


Fiscal year ending in— 


state 










1939 

1940 

1941 

1942 

1943 

1944 

1945 

1946 


C. License and privilege taxes: 


Arkansas... 

Colorado—.. 

Florida___ 

Iowa_.... 

Alcoholic beverages 

ABCQ 

ABC 

ABC 

ABCG 

ABC 

ABC 

ABCQ 

ABC 

ABC 

Q 

A 

ABC 

ABCQ 

ABCG 

ABCQ 

ABC 

ABC 

G 

A 

ABC 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABC 

ABC 

Q 

A 

ABC 

ABCQ 

ABCQ 

ABCQ 

ABC 

ABC 

ABCG 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

Massachusetts. 

Nebraska.. 

New Mexico—.. 

Oregon___ 

South Dakota.... 

A 

ABC 

ABCG 

ABCQ 

ABC 

A 

ABCG 

A 

ABC 

ABCQ 

ABCG 

A 

ABC 

ABCG 

ABCG 

A 

ABC 

ABCQ 

ABCG 

ABC 

ABCG 

ABCQ 

ABC 

ABCQ 

ABCG 

Texas.. 

Wyoming... 

A 

A 

A 

A 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

Arkansas_ 

Massachusetts__ 

North Dakota.. 









Amusements and race tracks 

ABCG 

A 

ABCG 

A 

ABCG 

A 

ABCQ 

A 

A 

ABCG 

A 

A 

ABCG 

A 

A 

ABCG 

A 

A 

A 

A 

A 

A 

A 

A 

A 

A 

Oregon .. 




Texas... 

Colorado___ 

Massachusetts_ 

A 

A 

A 

A 

A 

A 

Corporations in general 

A 

A 

A 

A 

A 

ABCG 

A 

A 

ABCG 

A 

A 

ABCQ 

A 

A 

ABCG 

A 

A 

New Mexico... 

Arkansas_ 

Florida_ 

ABCQ 

ABCG 

ABCQ 

ABCQ 

ABCQ 

Other 8 

ABCG 

A 

A 

A 

C 

A 

C 

A 

C 

A 

C 

C 

C 

Maryland. ... 

ABCG 

A 



Texas__ 

A 

A 

A 

A 

A 

A 

A 

A 


D. Other types of revenue: 


Property taxes 


Alabama __ 

Arizona_ 

Maryland A..__ 

A 

A 

ABCG 

G 

A 

A 

A 

A 

A 

A 

A 

A 

A 

A 

A 

A 

A 

A 

A 

Minnesota... 

Nevada... 

Arkansas.. 

Iowa__ 

Maryland... 

G 

A 

Q 

A 

G 

A 

G 

A 

G 

A 

Q 

A 

A 

A 

Individual and corporation income taxes 

A G 
ABCG 

A Q 

ABCG 

A 

ABCG 
A G 

ABCG 

A 

ABCG 

A 

ABCG 

A 

A 

A 

Massachusetts__ 



A 

A 

A 

A 



Colorado... ... . . 
Massachusetts_ . 






Death and gift taxes 

A 

A 

A 

A 

A 

ABC 

A 

A 

ABC 

A 

A 

ABC 

A 

A 

ABC 

A 

A 

Nebraska_ . 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 


See footnotes at end of table. 


22 














































































































































Table 2. —Types of State revenues earmarked wholly or partly for public assistance, 

1939-47 —Continued 


State 


Fiscal year ending in— 


1939 

1940 

1941 

1942 

1943 

1944 

1945 

1946 


1947 


D. Other types of revenue— Continued _ 

Severance taxes 


Nevada_ 

A 

ABCG 

A 

ABCG 

A 

ABCG 

ABC 

A 

ABCG 

ABC 

A 

ABCG 

ABC 

A 

ABCG 

ABC 

A 

ABCG 

ABC 

A 

ABCG 

ABC 

A 

ABCG 

ABC 

New Mexico_ 

Texas _ 

Connecticut__ 

Nebraska_ 



Per capita taxes 

AB 

ABC 

AB 

ABC 

AB 

ABC 

AB 

ABC 

AB 

ABC 

AB 

ABC 

AB 

ABC 

AB 

ABC 

AB 

ABC 

Alabama_ 

Other revenues * 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABCG 



ABCG 

ABCG 





Oregon__ 

ABCG 

ABCG 

ABC 

ABCG 

ABC 

ABCG 

ABC 

ABCG 

ABC 

ABCG 

ABC 

ABCG 

ABC 

ABCG 

ABC 

Tpxas .... _ _ 


ABCG 












Note: A designates old-age assistance; B, aid to the blind; C, aid to dependent children; G, general 
assistance. 

1 Compensating use tax only. 

2 Use tax only earmarked for general assistance; sales tax earmarked for 3 special types of public assistance. 

3 States listed under B include only those that earmarked tor public assistance separately imposed sales 
taxes on selected commodities and services; see footnotes 4 and 5 for lists of States in which given selected 
commodities and services are specifically covered by general sales taxes earmarked for public assistance. 

‘ Certain types of public-utility receipts and admissions and amusements are subject to the earmarked 
general sales taxes in the following States listed in section A of this tabulation: Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, 
Iowa, Kansas, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming. 

^ Includes commodities and services as follows: Maryland, cosmetics; Massachusetts, certam restaurant 
meals; Oklahoma, used cars; Texas, motor vehicles, radios, cosmetics, playing cards, carbon black, cement, 
oil and gas-well servicing, and insurance premiums. Restaurant meals are subject to the earmarked general 
sales taxes in Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Kansas, Oklahoma, Utah, and Wyoming. 

3 Includes license and privilege taxes as follows: Arkansas, license fees for certain itinerant merchants 
(old-age assistance only), vending-machine licenses (1939 only), and travel bureau taxes (old-age assistance 
only, 1939-45); Florida, truck maintenance tag fees and special automobile licenses; Maryland, coin-operated 
machine licenses, motor-vehicle operators’ licenses, and motor-vehicle titling tax; Texas, coin-operated 
niachine licenses 

2 Property tax' earmarked for Confederate pensions, but most of the Confederate pension fund used for 
old-age assistance. 

* Personal property tax only. , „ 

«Includes revenues as follows: Alabama, Oregon, and Wyoming, proceeds of alcoholic-bperage mo- 
nopoly systems; Arkansas, proceeds from sale of State-owned land; Maryland, tax on recording of docu- 
ments; Texas, tax on stock transfers. 


23 




























































Table 3. —Number of States with earmarked revenues for public assistance derived 

from specified sources, 1939-47 


In any 


Fiscal year ending in— 


Type of revenue 

year, 

1939-47 

1939 

1940 

1941 

1942 

1943 

1944 

1945 

1946 

1947 

Total... 

26 

25 

20 

20 

21 

22 

22 

21 

16 

16 

Sales taxes...... 

22 

21 

16 

16 

17 

18 

17 

16 

13 

13 

General sales taxes.. 

13 

12 

10 

10 

9 

10 

9 

8 

7 

7 

Selective sales taxes... 

20 

17 

14 

14 

15 

15 

13 

13 

10 

10 

Alcoholic beverages... _ 

15 

14 

11 

12 

11 

11 

9 

9 

6 

6 

Motor-vehicle fuels.. 

3 

3 

2 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

1 

Tobacco products.. 

6 

2 

2 

2 

4 

4 

4 

4 

3 

3 

Public utilities... 

3 

2 

2 

3 

3 

3 

2 

2 

2 

2 

Pari-mutuels_ 

3 

2 

2 

2 

3 

3 

3 

3 

1 

1 

Admissions and amusements... 

4 

4 

3 

3 

2 

2 

2 

2 

1 

1 

Other selective sales taxes_ 

4 

1 

1 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

1 

1 

License and privilege taxes. 

13 

11 

8 

9 

10 

10 

9 

9 

7 

7 

Alcoholic beverages..... 

11 

10 

8 

9 

9 

9 

8 

8 

5 

5 

Amusements and race tracks_ 

5 

3 

3 

3 

4 

4 

4 

5 

3 

3 

Corporations in general .. 

3 

2 

2 

2 

3 

3 

3 

3 

2 

2 

Other license and privilege taxes.. 

4 

3 

2 

2 

3 

3 

3 

3 

2 

2 

1 

Property taxes__ 

5 

5 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

2 

2 

Individual and corporation income 











taxes.. 

4 

2 

1 

2 

3 

3 

3 

3 

1 

1 

Death and gift taxes.. 

3 

2 

2 

2 

3 

3 

3 

3 

2 

2 

Severance taxes___ 

3 

2 

2 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

Per capita taxes.... 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

2 

Other revenues.. 

6 

4 

2 

3 

4 

4 

4 

4 

3 

3 


Table 4. —Number of programs with earmarked revenues for public assistance 

derived from specified sources, 1939-47 


Type of revenue 

In any 



Fiscal year ending in- 




y till f 

1939^7 

1939 

1940 

1941 

1942 

1943 

1944 

1945 

1946 

19t7 

Total.____ 

74 

70 

55 

57 

57 

59 

55 

53 

44 

44 

General sales taxes.... 

43 

39 

33 

32 

31 

32 

29 

27 

23 

23 

Selective sales taxes: 











Alcoholic beverages.. 

45 

42 

31 

34 

33 

33 

29 

29 

21 

21 

Motor-vehicle fuels__ 

8 

8 

7 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

3 

Tobacco products_ 

10 

4 

4 

4 

8 

8 

6 

6 

5 

5 

Public utilities_ 

5 

2 

2 

5 

5 

5 

4 

4 

4 

4 

Pari-mutuels___ 

6 

5 

5 

5 

6 

6 

6 

6 

1 

1 

Admissions and amusements. 

10 

10 

6 

6 

5 

5 

5 

5 

1 

1 

Other selective sales taxes.. 

9 

4 

1 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

3 

3 

License and privilege taxes; 











Alcoholic beverages_ 

33 

30 

23 

24 

24 

24 

25 

25 

17 

17 

Amusements and race tracks_ 

8 

6 

6 

6 

7 

7 

7 

8 

3 

3 

Corporations in general.. 

6 

5 

5 

5 

6 

6 

6 

6 

5 

5 

Other license and privilege taxes.. 

10 

9 

2 

2 

3 

3 

3 

3 

2 

2 

Property taxes_ 

8 

8 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

4 

2 

2 

Individual and corporation income 











taxes.. 

11 

6 

2 

5 

7 

6 

6 

6 

1 

1 

Death and gift taxes.. 

5 

4 

4 

4 

5 

5 

5 

5 

4 

4 

Severance taxes.. 

8 

5 

5 

8 

8 

8 

8 

8 

8 

8 

Per capita taxes__ 

5 

5 

5 

5 

5 

5 

5 

5 

5 

5 

Other revenues.... 

23 

16 

8 

11 

15 

15 

15 

15 

11 

11 


24 


U. S. 50VERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE; 1948 















































































SOURCES OF REVENUE 
FOR THE STATE SHARE 
OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE 
1947-49 


» 


FEDERAL SECURITY AGENCY 
Social Security Administration 
Bureau of Public Assistance 

Supplement 1 to Public Assistance Report No. 16 







































SOURCES OF REVENUE FOR THE STATE SHARE OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE, 
FISCAL YEARS 1947-1949 


I This release which is a supplement to an earlier report on this subject '\J 

j^brings up to date the information on the basic sources of State revenues—general 
[ funds, earmarked taxes, or both—for all public assistance programs in the conti- 
: nental United States, Alaska, and Hawaii. Data have been summarized for all pro¬ 
grams in which there was State financial participation, whether or not Federal 
' funds were provided. In addition, information is presented on the specific types 
; of taxes earmarked for assistance by the States that used earmarked revenues alone, 
or in combination with general revenues to finance the State share of one or more 
assistance programs. No information in included on the sources of local revenue. 

During the fiscal year 1949 State funds accounted for $871 million, or 44o7 
percent of the $ 1,950 million expended for assistance payments; about $889 million 
(45 06 percent) came from Federal funds and $190 million (9®7 percent) from local 
funds. The expenditures from State funds for assistance payments in 1949 repre¬ 
sented a 42 percent increase over the amount spent in 1947® These funds are de¬ 
rived from general revenues, earmarked taxes, or a combination of both. General 
revenues include all funds not specifically set aside for particular purposes. In 
1949 more than three-fourths of the State funds came from the general revenues of 
44 States, including the 12 that used general funds in combination with earmarked 
revenues. On the other hand, earmarked taxes include all those sources from which 
the proceeds, in whole or in part, were to be set aside for public assistance. 

For the country as a whole, the sources of State funds were practically the 
same in 1949 as in 1947® Among the six States that had changes in revenue sources, 
three made greater use of general revenues whereas three other States used earmark¬ 
ed revenues more extensively (table 1). 

Basic Sources in 1949 


In 1949 about three-fifths of the States tJ met the State share of public 
assistance entirely from general revenues. These 32 States provided State funds 
for a total of 118 programs—the 3 special types of public assistance in all 32 
States, and general assistance in 23 States. 

The remaining 19 States "earmarked'* State revenues for one or more of their 
assistance programs, ij Seven of these States depended entirely on earmarked funds 
for all assistance programs; the others used a combination of earmarked and general 
revenues, or general revenues alone for one or more programs. These 19 States pro¬ 
vided State funds for 69 programs—all 4 assistance programs in 13 States, the 3 
special types only in 5 States, and old-age assistance and aid to the blind only 


"ij Epler, Elizabeth G., Sources of Revenue for the State Share of Public Assistanc' 
1939 - 47 . Federal Security Agency, Social Security Administration, Bureau of Pub' 
lie Assistance, Public Assistance Report No. 15, June 1948. 

Includes Alaska and Hawaii. 
y For Alaska, includes only old-age assistance and aid to dependent children; no ^ 
program for aid to the blind. 

y See discussion of "earmarking" in Public Assistance Report No. 15, Sources of 
Revenue for the State Share of Public Assistance, 1939-47 . pp. 3-4® 


Si' 

I ml • 









- 2 - 


in 1 State, For 34 of these programs only earmarked revenues were used; 20 pro¬ 
grams were financed by a combination of earmarked and general revenues; and 13 
were financed entirely from general revenues. 


Source of State funds for public assistance, fiscal year 1949 


Source of 

Number 

States ^ 

State funds 

of States 

General revenues 

32 

Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Con- ^ 

only, all programs 


necticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, ’ i 
Georgia, Idaho, Indiana, Kentucky, Maine, 1 
Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota,! 



Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire] 
New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Penn¬ 
sylvania, South Carolina, South Dakota, Ver- 


mont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, 
Wisconsin, Wyoming 


Hawaii, Kansas, New Mexico, North Dakota, 
Oregon, Texas, Utah 

Alabama, Colorado, Florida, Illinois, Iowa, 
Louisiana, Nebraska, Nevada, Ohio, Oklahoma, / 
Rhode Island, Tennessee 


Shifts Between 1947 and 1949 

During the last 2 years, six States changed the sources of revenue 
State share of public assistance. In 1949 relatively greater use of general rev¬ 
enues was made by three States—Connecticut, Iowa, and Nebraska, Connecticut 
which had used the proceeds from a poll tax in combination with general funds for 
old-age assistance and aid to the blind, shifted in 1948 to the use of general | 
revenues only for these two programs. The change in Iowa affected only the old- 
age assistance program. From 1939 through 1947, this program was financed entire¬ 
ly by the proceeds of certain sales, individual and corporation income taxes and j 
special corporation taxes; in 1948 and 1949, however, the legislature appropri¬ 
ated an annual amount of $2 million from the general fund to supplement the |l0 
million derived annually from earmarked revenues. 



Earmarked revenues 7 

only, all programs 

Various combinations 12 

of general and ear¬ 
marked revenues 


Nebraska which had earlier relied solely on earmarked revenues for the 
three special types of public assistance continued to use some earmarked funds 
but also drew heavily on general revenues for 1948 and 1949* Prior to 1948, the 
taxes earmarked for public assistance included certain alcoholic beverage taxes, 
motor fuel taxes, excise and estate taxes, and per capita taxes; only the two 
last-named groups of taxes were earmarked for public assistance in 1948 and 1949* 


On the other hand, earmarked revenues were used to a larger extent by thr« 
other States—Louisiana, Rhode Island, and Tennessee, In 1949 Louisiana shifted 
from the use of general funds only, to a combination of general and earmarked rev 
enues for financing all four assistance programs, thus reverting to the pattern I 











- 3 “ 


that existed in 1940. As a result of a liberalization of the old-age assistance 
law, and of changes in general public welfare legislation, expenditures from State 
funds for public assistance in Louisiana during 1949 were about four times as 
large as in 194S. To provide additional funds for this greatly expanded program, 
the State legislature assigned the proceeds of a general sales tax to the welfare 
fund. In addition to these earmarked funds, the welfare fund had an unexpended 
balance of $25 million which previously had been appropriated from general revenues. 

From 1940 through 1947, Rhode Island used general revenues for all four as¬ 
sistance programs; in 1948 and 1949, however, a public assistance reserve fund, 
established in 1942 and derived in part from earmarked revenues, was drawn upon to 
supplement general funds for the general assistance program. 

Tennessee, which had previously used only general funds for the three spe¬ 
cial types of public assistance, began in 1948 to use both general and earmarked 
revenues. Through a ruling of the State attorney general, about $2 million from 
sales tax revenues was released to the welfare department effective April 1, 1948, 
and another $2 million from the same source for the fiscal year 1949 • 

Trends in Revenue Sources 


Over the past 10 years, the number of States using general revenues only 
for all assistance programs advanced significantly in 1940 and again in 1946. As 
shown in the tabulation below, in each instance the number remained the same in 
the succeeding year, but declined in the next 2 years. It remains to be seen 
whether the next few years will show a further drop or another upward shift. 

Number of States meeting State share of public assistance from specified source, 

1939-1949 


Fiscal 

year 

General 
revenues 
only, all 
programs 

Earmarked 
revenues 
only, all 
programs 

General and earmarked revenues 

General revenues 
only, 1 or more 
programs; earmark¬ 
ed only or general 
and earmarked, 
other programs 

Other combinations 
of general and 
earmarked revenues 

1939o...o 

25 

9 

10 

7 

1940 . 

30 

9 

8 

4 

19 a..... 

30 

9 

8 

4 

1942 . 

29 

8 

10 

4 

1943. 

28 

8 

11 

4 

1944 . 0 ... 

28 

9 

12 

2 

1945 . 

29 

9 

11 

2 

1946. 

34 

8 

8 

1 

1947 . 

34 

8 

8 

1 

1948..... 

33 

7 

6 

3 

1949. 

32 

7 

8 

4 






















- 4 - 


In terms of programs the trend in revenue sources is similar to that for 
States. Thus, the number of programs financed entirely from general revenues rose 
from 109 in 1939, to 125 in 1941; and from 128 in 1945, to 139 in 1946 and 1947• 
The decline to 133 that occurred in 1949 was somewhat greater, however, than that 
in the early forties. 

Number of programs with State share of public assistance financed 
from specified source, 1939-1949 


Fiscal year 

General revenues only 

iiarmarked revenues only or 
general and earmarked revenues 

Total 

OAA 

AB 

ADC 

GA 

Total 

OAA 

AB 

ADC 

GA 

1939. 

109 

29 

29 

29 

22 

74 

22 

18 

17 

17 

1940. 

123 

33 

33 

32 

25 

59 

18 

14 

13 

14 

1941.. 

125 

33 

33 

34 

25 

61 

18 

15 

14 

14 

1942. 

124 

32 

34 

34 

24 

61 

19 

15 

14 

13 

1943. 

123 

31 

34 

35 

23 

63 

20 

15 

14 

14 

1944....... 

126 

31 

35 

37 

23 

59 

20 

14 

13 

12 

1945. 

128 

32 

35 

37 

24 

57 

19 

14 

13 

11 

1946. 

139 

36 

38 

38 

27 

48 

15 

12 

12 

9 

1947. 

139 

36 

38 

38 

27 

48 

15 

12 

12 

9 

1948. 

137 

36 

38 

37 

26 

50 

15 

12 

13 

10 

1949. 

133 

35 

37 

36 

25 

54 

16 

13 

14 

11 


Types of Earmarked Taxes 

Of the 19 States earmarking revenues for 54 assistance programs in 1949, 14 
earmarked general sales or use taxes, or sales taxes on selected commodities. Gen¬ 
eral sales or use taxes were earmarked for nine States; four of these States and 
five others earmarked selective sales taxes, frequently on alcoholic beverages. 
Most of the States earmarking general or selective sales taxes earmarked other 
types of revenues. Other types of taxes earmarked for public assistance included 
license and privilege taxes, death and gift taxes, severance taxes, income taxes, 
and various others (table 2). 

The States which earmark certain taxes for public assistance are not the 
only ones that use the proceeds of such taxes for assistance. In States using 
general revenues for the assistance programs, the financing actually is shared by 
all State revenues assigned to the general fund. For example, of the 29 States 
with general sales taxes in 1949, only 9 earmarked such taxes for assistance. In 
all 29 States, however, general sales tax revenues were undoubtedly very important 
to public assistance. 





























- 5 - 


Table 1. Sources of State revenues—general and earaarked—for public assistance, 1947-49 


State 

Fiscal year 
ending in 

► 

GF only 

GF and SR 

ZR only 

Alabama. 

1947-49 


ABCG 


Alaska.. 

1947-49 

A CG 



Arlsona. 

1947-49 

ABCG 



Arkansas. 

1947-49 

ABCG 



California. 

1947-49 

ABC 1 / 



Colorado. 

1947-49 

G 


ABC 

Connecticut.. 

1947 

CG 

AB 



1943-49 

ABCG 



Delaware. 

1947-49 

ABCG 2 / 



District of Columbia.. 

1947-49 

ABCG 



Florida. 

1947-49 

B 

A C 


Georgia. 

1947-49 

ABC 



Hawaii. 

1947-49 


• 

ABCG 2 / 

Idaho. 

1947-49 

ABC 


Illinois. 

1947-49 

ABC 

G 


Indisma. 

1947-49 

ABC 



Iowa ^. 

1947 

BC 


A 


1943-49 

BC 

A 


Kansas... 

1947-49 



ABCG 

Kentucky. 

1947-49 

ABC 



Louisiana... 

1947-43 

ABCG 




1949 


ABCG 


Maine.. 

1947-49 

ABCG 



Maryland. 

1947-49 

ABCG 



Massachusetts... 

1947-49 

ABCG 



Michigan.. 

1947-49 

ABCG 



Minnesota..... 

1947-49 

ABCG 



Mi ssissippi.. 

1 J 47-49 

ABC 



Missouri. 

1947-49 

ABCG 



Montana. 

1947-49 

ABCG 



Nebraska. 

191^7 



ABC 


1943-49 


ABC 


Nevada... 

1947-49 

B 


A 

New Hampshire. 

1947-49 

ABC 



New Jersey. 

1947-49 

ABCG 



New Mexico. 

1947-49 



ABCG 

New York. 

1947-49 

ABCG 



North Carolina. 

19^7-49 

ABC 



North Dakota. 

1947 -J ^9 



ABCG 5/ 

Ohio. 

1947-49 

AB(f 

G 


Oklahoma. 

1947-49 

Ig 


ABC 

Oregon. 

1947-49 



ABCG 

Pennsylvania. 

1947-49 

ABCG 



Rhode Island.... 

1947 

ABCG 




1943-49 

ABC 

0 6 / 


South Carolina. 

1947-49 

ABCG 



South Dakota. 

1947-49 

ABC 



Tennessee. 

1947 

ABC 




1943-49 


ABC 


Texas. 

1947-49 



ABO 

Utah. 

1947-49 



ABCG 

Vermont. . . 

1947-49 

ABCG 



Virginia. 

1947-49 

ABCG 



Washington.. 

1947-49 

ABCG 



West Virginia......... 

1947-49 

ABCG 



Wisconsin.... 

1947-49 

ABCG 



Wyoming... 

1947-49 

ABCG 




Note Tor Source of Revenue ; OF designates general-fund revenues; KR earnarked revenues. For 

programs: A designates old-age assistance; B, aid to the blind; C, aid to dependent children; 

0, general assistance. 

\J No State funds made available for general assistance after 1941, but legislation effective 
July l4, 194^, provides for State participation in direct and administrative costs of 
welfare activities in amy county in which annual expenditure rate for such activities ex¬ 
ceeds 8/100 of 1 percent of total assessed valuation of property subject to county tsiz. 

2/ Amounts made available for general assistance by Permanent Budget Commission from State 
iiaergency Fund. 

Jj $90,000 from general revenues for a 6-inonth period may be transferred by the Governor on a 
non-re fundable basis to the public welfare fund used for all programs. 

^ No funds appropriated or earmarked for general assistance after 1943, but balances remained 
available; no expenditures from State funds for this program in 1946-^+9. 

^ Use of general revenues authorised for all programs to make up difference between appropri¬ 
ations and receipts from earmarked revenues. 

6/ Certain inheritance tax collections allocated to State Public Assistance Reserve Fund 

(established.July 1942); proceeds for 1943 only available to Fund; no appropriation from * 
Fund made by legislature until 1948. 






























































- 6 - 


fablv 2 .—>T 3 rp«s of Stats rsvsnues aaraarkied VI10II7 or partly for public 

assistancs, 1947-^9 



Fiscal 

year 

General 
sales, 
use, or 

Sales taxes om 
selected commodi¬ 
ties and services 

Licenses and 
privilege taxes 

Other 

SUte 

ending 

gross 





. roTenu*t 







in 

receipts 

Alcoholic 

Other \J 

Alcoholic 

Other 




taxes 

beverages 

beverages 



(1) 

( 2 ) 

( 3 ) 

( 4 ) 

( 5 ) 

(6) 

( 7 ) 

11 fh ....... 

1947-49 

1947-49 






ABCO ^ 

A 4 / / 

Colorado.. 

ABC 

ABC 


ABC 


Connecticut... 
Florida. 

1947 

1947-49 

1947-49 



A6/ 


.AB 2 / 

01/ 

Hawaii. 




ABCO ^ 

Illinois. 

Iowa... 

1947-49 

1947-49 

1947-49 

1949 

A 





A ^ 

Kn-nsSS. ....... 

ABCO 

ABCO 




Louisiana..... 

ABCO 

ABC 11 / 




Babraatra,,,,,, 

1947 

1948-49 


ABC 

ABC 


ABC ^ 

ABC ^ 



\ 


Hawada... 

1947-49 

1947-49 






AB^Ig/ 

New Mexico.... 

ABCO 14 / 

ABCO 

A2/ 

ABCO 

ABCO U 

North Dakota.. 

Ohin^ , 

1947-49 

1947-49 

1947-49 

1947-49 

ABCO 



A 1 ^ 

0 m 

ABC 2 / 



ABC 





^ . 

Oregon. 

ABCO 

ABCO 

A 16/ 

ABCO y/ 

0 5 / 

Hhode Island.. 

Tennessee. 

eawfia, . 

194 frJ 49 

1948-49 

1947-49 

1947-49 

ABC 

ABC 

ABC 12 / 

ABC 

A ^ 

ABC 21 / 

Utah. 

ABCO 


u 



States with programii listed in this column include only those that earmarked for 
public assistance separately imposed taxes on selected conaodlties and serrices. 
Public utility receipts and admissions and amusements, on which separately- 
imposed taxes are earmarked for public assistance in two of these States, au-e 
subject to the earmarked general sales tax in the following States for which pro¬ 
grams are listed in column 2 of this table: Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, 
Korth Dakota, CMahoma, Tennessee, and Utah. 

For all programs, proceeds of alcoholic beverage monopoly systems; for A, property 
tax earmarked for Confederate pension fUnd, most of which is used for old-age 
assistance. 

Corporations in general. 

Death and gift taxes. 

Per capita taxes. 

Parl-Butuels. 

Truck maintenance tag fees and special automobile licenses. 

IndiTldual income taxes. 

Tobacco products. 

IndiTldual and corporation income taxes. 

Motor-rehicle fuels. 

Death and gift taxes and per capita taxes. 

Property and severance taxes. 

Coiq;>ensating use tax only. 

Severance taxes. 

Amusements and race tracks. 

Public utilities. 

Proceeds of alcoholic beverage monopoly systems. 

For all programs; public utilities, motor vehicles, radios, cosmetics, playing 
cards, csu-bon black, cement, oil and gas-well servicing, and insurance premiums; 
for A only: admissions and amusements. 

Amusements and racs tracks, and coin-operated machine licensee. 

Severance taxes and tax on stock transfers. 






































I 




I 


3 




I 


A 


ct- 


V 



/ 












0 • / 1 * . V 





0 ■ ‘ 

° ’ f ® 

C' , 0 ^ * 1 ,*°' ^ 

• <V^ 















•■ ,n C^ 







A ‘ 




^ o 

" -l' 

■■‘0 

vT* ® 






^ <{.^ O 0 

. <j) ^ ° " ® 


O > 








V^ 





I *» 




vPS 

* /& 

* '» •<?'-. ^ 

' \'^' ‘ ’ \'^ -c*:* . 

.i^r- 

0 '’ * '^o ^ ° 






\ y ' ^ 

j^a/M^'^ Ai .-fy- !. »??». ^ . ' t ^ >iV' ^ .=1 a - • . . '^ 

A? ^o>' o V J)§.\K ■* A V • ^iilS ■» A? oX/ JS.Xy * aV 

^ ^ •• '!' oX ci- • ^ V r? -'V ^Va. . 

, 0 ^ 'o..'» A ^ 0 ^ - 

" ^ a^ o ® ^ ° -9 (V * ^ ^O ® ^ ^ ^ ^ 

\0 V^, " “ .,-1 P>. 

O * 0 O 


o * 



-i* " A"' ^ 

C\ . 0 ^ v 

'^>v A^ A ^ ^ • 

• -<^0 C.^ 


- . - ^-^uuwx^ . 

- 0 HO . 

: A \ XX 



-»r^CT^ ^ <L^ • 

<:> Jy %r ' 

T>. 

• ^ 0 


^ " V^ . s 

C yce/r??:^^ ^ 4'^ y.s:^y 

' • -O # » 


A 


'^ot.-*' . 

/ aO ^ h 

«o ,0 ^ ,,^- Xi - 

A^ '' 1 ,‘cf- V^ **•' 

^ 5 ^ • V j - Vi 

* ^ ^ cC <\ MA‘'o * ' 

-i « 3S 




a ' 

'>X v "^ 

o V 




//IWj^ V 
/jr^ ^ 



- 

\ 

A,*- 

A^ 


'V ^ A ' 

A <^ %. '‘’“^ .\^ <- 

0 ^ '^o v ^ : 

X '*•-»’■ ^. o '’ % 

'.X -' k ' i '- x - i ^- =: 

• c,'^ ♦ rA'^r A, '' A «>■ 

*• .n C ^ 



'-u 

<? XXzA < 



■ X X >'X 
■- XX :£m 


















'.■' r'^'' ** .'^ ^ '- 

‘ * A 

O c ® ®'t 

J»: "bv*' : 

';»o A 'Vt. *■'5!^ 

^0 ^ 

rO • / 1 • <X^ 


%■& - 


S 

•* •" 

<* btL^ ^ 

^ <CL* ^ • 

^ * . , , • ^ O * „ , 0 ’ 

• ^ 
r . rk ^ -' 


♦ o^v ■* A > '*^>.. ♦ 

7. *' ,0^ o^ "o . »* A 


_4 

^ 0 


.6^ t • "JJ ^ <>fcL'' ^ 

l. ^ O .1^ • <► ^ 




■p ^ 

'^o ^ 


. t / IT , 

v^ /-O t* - o 

-7^ . ^ -*■ 

^4 
0 


> 




’'^ a'^ '■ 

• * 

VA 






o . . - A ^ - 

*» <i <5o\\\ri'^ '*‘ 

o V 




^ O 


"> ■^/ A 

^ o' 


“ ^ '^V V 

A'' ° ° * 

'I*®' 

'S'<p i^^/A\ 

® oT/y/^^'‘ ■> ^^GM i i i^^ o A'^n 

o^ ^ 'o. » - A ^ 

(j^ yJ/TT^,- °o 0 °"^ 





.Ov-: 


• 4 0 • 

N A > ^ sft o 

• y "-o’ 0^ 

<-A » 





o • A 




y/fij'^ 't 

/Jr^ ^ 


^ *» 

/I * 4 

- 

v' 

Vo "V 




A * 

o V 



' TLn 








/ 'V %> \ 

w * \y A' 'o^ -o.* 

^ A*^ c ° ^ ® ^ fV 0 « c 

'J*- y ^ vv* A^ 


A^^' A’*° 

* ^ 

•- vP 


° S-O-V - 

»«o’ ^0 "»' ’ • *o;oO 

“ <b‘^v ° , 

" A -e. ^o. 'o-.A A 


r<> 



' A^ 



■'o V 

o A -TV ” 



'^o' 




“■ ■'^V A *■ 0 ^Mz<y^ ^ 


Ao’ 



.• ^ 0 ' V -^-/ V '--”’ ,-o 




• < O^ • 

V ^ « 

* ' o - ° 





cO^’-^ 

■" "tu A 


cy .-'^y 0 d* <.K O ^ 

-O'’- "o-oo ^0 o 

'■t(C\WA o ^ A^ * c^ 

Vv 

> 4 ^ • ^ ^ -%Pyir/» A ^ A •<#' 

'o.A A *v_s^ ^ 'c . ^ .A 




OOBBtBSOS- , 

library BINOINO A ^ ^ 

A ^ 


if,UG 7 0 _<^ 

ST. AUGUSTINE , 



32084 „ 







